The Mountain’s Burning:
A case study

by Bart Meehan, Associate Director, Facilities and Services

Introduction

This paper details the experience of The Australian National University during the January 2003 bushfires that devastated the Australian Capital Territory. As a result of those fires, the University suffered significant asset losses at its Mount Stromlo campus.

The paper is divided into the following sections:

• Background, including details of the University and its risk management strategy
• Description of disaster and our business continuity response
• The lessons we have learned

Background

The Australian National University is located in Canberra, with its main campus at Acton.

Mount Stromlo is approximately five kilometres to the south and is the home to the Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (RSAA). The campus is in the middle of a pine forest, which was planted by the ACT Government for commercial harvesting.

The site was established as the Commonwealth Solar Observatory in 1924, although astronomical observations had been carried out on the mountain as early as the previous decade. In fact, the Oddie telescope (which was destroyed in the fire) was constructed in 1911 and the dome built to house it was the first Federal building in the newly established Australian Capital Territory. Consequently, the Mount Stromlo had significant historical value and several buildings were heritage listed. These included the Administration Building and the telescopes. Other major buildings on the site included the Technical Workshops, Duffield and Woolley Buildings and the Exploratory/Visitors’ Centre (all but the workshops were relatively new buildings having been constructed within the past fifteen years). The campus also had eight residences, including the heritage listed Director’s Residence and the “Bachelors’ Quarters” (which was used as student and visitor accommodation). The houses, located on the eastern side of the mountain just below the Observatory, were occupied by staff associated with RSAA.

Mount Stromlo is a known bushfire area, and indeed, the campus had been damaged in two previous bushfires (in the 1930s and 1950s). The site came under threat again, during the bushfires that affected Canberra at Christmas 2001/2002 and as a consequence, the University established a project to reduce the fire risk. This project included clearing of vegetation on the western face of the mountain (given the prevailing winds, this is the direction that presents the greatest fire threat), improving water pressure and installing external sprinkler systems on Technical workshops. In total $600,000 had been spent on addressing risk areas that had been identified as part of an external fire engineering study conducted in early 2002.

In addition, the University had been developing its Emergency Management Strategy. In essence, this strategy established the “chain of command” and through that defined the specific management roles for University officers, not only as part of the immediate response to a disaster, but also in establishing arrangements to facilitate business continuity. (The public version of the strategy is available at the following URL: http://www.anu.edu.au/bcp).

As part of the Emergency Management Strategy, the University also developed the Mount Stromlo Bushfire Response Plan. This plan focussed on ensuring that staff and students were protected in the event of a major bushfire. Largely, protection of the building asset was to be achieved through the installation of sprinklers and reducing fuel on the site. The plan was also heavily dependant on the ACT Bushfire Services and Fire Brigade being available to fight the fire.

18 January 2003

On 18 January 2003, a major fire front climbed the western face of Mount Stromlo and raced through the Observatory. In its wake, it left more than a dozen buildings, telescopes and residences in ruins.

The bush fires had been threatening the ACT for most of the previous week and, while there was some general community concern, it was tempered by advice that the fires remained within containment lines.

The University’s Fire and Safety Officer was serving as part of the volunteer bushfire brigade for most of that week. The situation he was seeing in the field on Thursday and Friday (16 and 17 January 2003) ran contrary to the generally optimistic reports being provided to the public. He felt the situation was deteriorating and that the Mount Stromlo campus would come under direct threat from the fires by the weekend. He passed this information back to University management.

On receiving this information, the University established contact with Emergency Services Bureau, who advised that their modelling suggested the fire would not reach Mount Stromlo before Sunday (19 January 2003) or Monday (20 January 2003)—“if at all”. They also stated that protection of the Observatory would become their highest priority. At this point, no one was predicting the disaster that hit the site (and Canberra’s southern suburbs) on 18 January 2003.

Given the concerns expressed by the Fire Safety Officer, University management elected to lease a diesel generator and place it at Mount Stromlo. This was done on the 17 January 2003. This generator was intended to provide emergency power to the water pumps in the event normal power supply failed.

On the morning of the 18 January 2003, the advice to the public still reflected cautious optimism. However, University staff in the field were observing conditions that reinforced their belief that Mount Stromlo would be under threat at some point during the day.

Around mid day, University management, with the assistance of the Fire Brigade, began evacuating staff in the offices, as well as visitors in the Visitor Centre Café. Some attempt was also made to protect valuable assets, by transporting those that were portable to the 74” Telescope. This building, having survived previous bushfires, had been the designated a “safe house” for many years—that is, the area where staff trapped by fire would congregate until the fire passed. This strategy had been reviewed in 2002 and it was felt that the building was not the best location for a safe house. The new location was the lecture theatre in the Duffield Building, which had sprinklers installed. (A good decision, as it turned out—the 74” Telescope was destroyed in the fires.)

Staff at Mount Stromlo observed that the fire, while some distance away, was travelling quickly. A decision was made around 2.00pm, to evacuate the residents. This was done with the assistance of the Australian Federal Police.

Back at the Acton campus, the University Security Office was fielding hundreds of calls. Some were general enquiries, while many others came from parents concerned about students undertaking summer studies on campus and academics concerned about their research materials. The Security Office is staffed on a 24 hours/7 days basis. The normal Saturday shift consisted of three officers. However, one of these officers had to leave, as his house was under threat from fires affecting the suburbs. The same issue meant the University was unable to call in extra security staff, leaving the office understaffed for the duration of the emergency.

While normal landline communications continued to function effectively, the firestorm conditions had a major effect on mobile telephone services. This made it difficult at times to contact key University officers.

As University management staff left Mount Stromlo, the fire was already on the western face of the mountain, only minutes away from the campus itself. Residents were leaving. However, there still appeared to be a sense of complacency—as if the fire was not real. Staff saw a woman planting trees and another sitting in her car at the forest edge speaking on a mobile telephone. Yet another (a young girl) was riding a horse along the forest trails on the eastern side of the site. By this time the flames could be seen at above the roofline of the buildings at the edge of the mountain.

Two residents elected to stay on the mountain to protect their house. Both had bushfire fighting experience. A third resident, an overseas student, was also left behind. The student had finished observing early that morning, and having been up all night, returned to the “Bachelors’ Quarters” and fell asleep. No one knew he was there and he was not woken by the sirens and calls of police and staff who were patrolling the area advising people to evacuate.

Somewhere between 2.30 and 3.00pm, the fire front hit the campus. The two residents who had decided to stay had devised a plan to deal with the fire. They would remain in the house, allowing the fire front to pass through the site, then fight the spot fires left in its wake. They had two fire extinguishers as well as bins filled with water that they intended to use. If they were unable to save the house, they would cover themselves in wet blankets and sit in the open until it was safe to walk off the mountain.

As the fire passed through, they noted that it was approximately 40–50 metres high and stretched across the mountain. The radiant heat off the fire ignited items up to five metres in front of it. Leaf and other materials were ignited and carried up by whirlwinds that circled inside the fire.

The front took approximately 20 minutes to pass through the site. Once it had, the two residents moved quickly. They checked the perimeter of the house, looking for and putting out any spot fires. One climbed up to the roof checking the eaves. He noticed a small fire and broke several roof tiles with his hands, then used an extinguisher to put the fire out. While fighting these fires, they suddenly noticed a figure moving through the smoke towards them. It was the student.

He had woken up at around 3.00pm and noticed his room was brightly lit. His first thought was that it was twilight and he should be heading back to the Observatory. However, he quickly realised that the light was fire from the passing front and flames in the ceiling.

He remembered reading a brochure he was given by someone when he first arrived in Australia. It explained what to do if you were trapped in a bushfire: stay inside until the front passes, then get out quickly and find an open space. At the time he thought the advice was ‘stupid’. Now he followed it to the letter. He took towels into the bathroom to wet them. He noticed flames coming through the vent. He turned on the sink taps and there was no water, just steam. He knew there were bottles of water in the fridge, so he used these to wet the towels and a blanket.

The Bachelors’ Quarters was divided into two residences. He noticed flames at the top of the dividing wall, and realised it was only a matter of minutes before his part of the house would be burning. He decided that now was the time to make for open ground. He went to the front door, covering himself in the wet blanket. He knew from ‘Hollywood movies’ that once he opened the door, the rush of air would fuel the fire, and accelerate the destruction of the house. There would be no turning back.

Once he was outside he made his way in the general direction of the playground (at the centre of the residential area). It was the only open space available to him. As he walked, the smoke was so thick he could barely see the ground below him. In the playground, he sat and waited to be rescued. After about 15 minutes, he noticed the two residents fighting to protect their house.

The three men spent the afternoon fighting spot fires around the residences. They ran out of water and extinguishers and with no way left to fight the fires, were forced to watch other houses burn. Around 5.00pm, they made their way up to the operational site. By that time, most of the buildings were on fire (the exceptions being the Woolley and Duffield buildings, Visitors’ Centre and the Reynolds telescope). The domes on the telescopes had already collapsed, as had the roof on the Workshops and Administration Building.

Business continuity

Early the next morning (19 January), the Vice Chancellor established a group to address the immediate emergency and to implement a business continuity strategy. The group consisted of accommodation services, facilities managers and communications services.

The first task was to assess the impact of the fires on the University community, including identifying which staff and students had lost their homes (not only at Mount Stromlo, but also in those suburbs that had been devastated). The Accommodation Services Office was tasked with finding appropriate short-term (and longer term) accommodation. The University also established an emergency fund to provide financial assistance. Information on these support arrangements was distributed through the local electronic media.

On 20 January 2003, the facilities and communications services officers completed an inspection of the Mount Stromlo site. They discovered that while most of the major of buildings had been destroyed, several key buildings remained largely intact. In particular, the Duffield and Woolley Buildings, which housed the offices of research and administrative staff.

The facilities managers established a business continuity strategy that was implemented that day, and designed to have the staff and students back to the Mount Stromlo site within two weeks. Key element of this plan was speed. The University set aside its normal purchasing/approval procedures, giving authority to the operational staff to engage relevant contract services. This was done within the first 48 hours, thereby beating the obvious demand that would come once the fire threat (that was still present – and would be for another week) had diminished. The University also moved to secure temporary buildings to replace the administrative and workshop areas that had been lost in the fire. Temporary accommodation (for students) was obtained by purchasing transportable cottages that been used to house athletes during the Sydney Olympics.

Two large (60KVA) generators, which had been purchased as part of the University Emergency Management Strategy, were deployed to Mount Stromlo and provided temporary power to undertake the necessary rectification work (Power to the site had been lost during the fire and would not be returned for a week).

In dealings with the staff and students working at Mount Stromlo following the fire, it was clear that they were distressed. In order to come to terms with the disaster, they needed to return to the site as soon as possible, to view the damage and to collect any personal items that may have survived. Despite the other demands placed on the business continuity team, they gave this a high priority and arranged for the staff to be bussed to the site on the Tuesday following the fires.

Over the following two weeks, the surviving buildings were cleaned and repaired and the communications, electrical, hydraulic and mechanical services restored. Most administrative and academic staff returned to the site by the end of January.

The loss of the technical workshops presented the greatest challenge. These could not be replaced in a short period. Consequently, a plan was developed to shift the technical work to other workshops on the Acton campus, while a temporary facility at Mount Stromlo was constructed over the next five months. This has recently been completed and the staff have moved back to the mountain.

Additionally, Astronomical Observing was transferred to the University’s other observatory at Siding Spring (Coonabarabran, NSW). It will remain at this location until the new telescopes are constructed at Mount Stromlo.

The campus was insured, using a replacement policy that also included cover for business continuity activities (such as establishing temporary facilities) and loss of business (to cover losses from the commercial activities within the Visitor’s Centre). The University arranged for the insurers’ loss adjusters to visit the site within the first week, allowing them to evaluate the level of damage. A University team was also established within the Financial and Business Services Division to manage the claim.

The likely size of the claim means that insurance issues will take time to resolve. There are still outstanding issues related to the valuations on buildings and contents, including cover for items that were on loan. One significant issue was that the insurance policy did not cover deforestation/reforestation. The campus included a pine forest of approximately 200 acres. The trees were severely damaged and need to be removed as they pose a safety hazard. The budget for logging of the forest (to stump level) will be in the order of $500K—a cost that will have to be met from University funds.

Fire engineering report

The University engaged an external fire engineer to investigate the fire behaviour and identify any issues that needed to be considered in the redesign of the campus. The engineer found that site was largely destroyed by spot fires.

The fire front struck the workshops on the western slope first. The external sprinklers engaged. However, when the water hit the already heated glass it shattered, thereby giving the fire access to the internal areas. Bushes and other flammable materials near buildings were ignited, creating spot fires that entered the buildings through vents and shattered windows. Embers fell on roofs, starting fires under the eaves.

The report also found that the clearing of vegetation earlier in 2002 had probably saved the Visitors’ Centre (also on the western face of the site). There was little fuel to feed the fire.

The Duffield and Woolley Buildings were saved by internal sprinklers. Several windows in these buildings shattered and the fire entered. However, the sprinklers engaged and extinguished it before it could build up any momentum.

Based on this report, the University has commenced a program of making all its properties “bushfire resistant”. This includes annual inspections of fuel loads, installing fire shutters on windows and vents, using intumescent paint on doors, and eventually retrofitting sprinklers in all critical buildings.

General lessons learned

The lessons learned fall into two categories. The first relates to fire risk management:

• Reduce fuel loads in surrounding bush land during winter.
• Have internal sprinkler systems installed, in all critical buildings.
• Seal all penetrations to buildings.
• Install fire screens on all windows.
• When constructing a building, use non flammable materials.

The more general lessons for disaster management/business continuity include:

• Ensure that you have an emergency management strategy that establishes a chain of command, with clear communication lines.
• Once the immediate emergency has been dealt with, move quickly to establish your business continuity strategy. Key within this is identifying the scope of works and engaging the relevant contract services.
• Reduce the bureaucratic delays by giving business continuity team members the appropriate level of authority to act when needed, (for example, in engaging contractors or making purchases).
• Remember the human toll of a disaster. Make provisions for those affected to have opportunities to visit the site and collect what may have survived or to speak with qualified counsellors.
• Do not depend on emergency services to save your asset. In the case of the Canberra bushfires they were overwhelmed by the size of the disaster. Ensure that you have plans to protect people and if possible, valuable assets.
• Review your insurance cover to ensure that it is complete. Insurance should not only cover asset and contents, but also business continuity and business loss. As part of this, review the valuations applied to your assets.

The future

While the University is still resolving insurance matters, the master planning process has already begun, involving a representative group of Mount Stromlo staff, University management and facilities managers. The aim is to return the campus to its former glory—restoring heritage buildings where possible, as well as building state of the art telescopes and workshops. This will be done over the next 3 to 5 years.