Pictures (left): All eyes on Les Pester , Civil Defence Officer from the Waimakariri District Council who helped the Ministry run 18 “Be a Survivor” sessions over the weekend for over 400 kids; (below): Les hands out the “Be Prepared” drink bottles which list the essential emergency survival items. Showcasing civil defence at Te Papa Showcasing civil defence at Te Papa Showcasing civil defence at Te Papa Showcasing civil defence at Te Papa Showcasing civil defence at Te Papa Volume 8 n August 2001 Civil defence and emergency services enjoyed a high profile during the Queen’s Birthday Weekend in June at Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington. The Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management was one of the key sponsors of the Natural Disaster Awareness Weekend hosted by Te Papa. Other sponsors were the Earthquake Commission and the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences. Participants included Wellington Emergency Management (City Council and Regional Council), NZ Fire Service, Wellington Police, helicopter rescue teams, Order of St John, Wellington Free Ambulance, and search and rescue dog teams. Ministry Communications Manager Chandrika Kumaran said a crowd of 12,000 was expected, but a total of about 25,000 came along. “The response was fantastic,” she said. “People had plenty to do and see, and hopefully they went away with a better idea of what to do to prepare for an emergency and an understanding of the calibre of the civil defence and emergency services available in New Zealand.” Over the three day weekend, visitors had the opportunity to see emergency services demonstrations ranging from sea and rescue winch demonstrations, aerial firefighting displays, car crash extrication enactments, search and rescue dog demonstrations, and high angle rescues. A big hit with the younger visitors were the ”Be a Survivor” sessions run by the Ministry. The sessions were made possible with the help of Les Pester, Emergency Management & Civil Defence Officer from Waimakariri District Council. continued on back page Twenty five thousand visitors to Te Papa over the Queen’s Birthday weekend in June were treated to a range of civil defence and emergency services demonstrations and displays.
Transcript
1
Pictures (left): All eyes on Les Pester , Civil DefenceOfficer from the Waimakariri District Council whohelped the Ministry run 18 “Be a Survivor”sessions over the weekend for over 400 kids;(below): Les hands out the “Be Prepared” drinkbottles which list the essential emergency survivalitems.
Showcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te Papa
Volume 8 n August 2001
Civil defence and emergency services enjoyed a high profileduring the Queen’s Birthday Weekend in June at Te PapaTongarewa, Wellington.
The Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management wasone of the key sponsors of the Natural Disaster AwarenessWeekend hosted by Te Papa.
Other sponsors were the Earthquake Commission and theInstitute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences. Participantsincluded Wellington Emergency Management (City Council andRegional Council), NZ Fire Service, Wellington Police, helicopterrescue teams, Order of St John, Wellington Free Ambulance, andsearch and rescue dog teams.
Ministry Communications Manager Chandrika Kumaran said acrowd of 12,000 was expected, but a total of about 25,000came along.
“The response was fantastic,” she said. “People had plenty to doand see, and hopefully they went away with a better idea ofwhat to do to prepare for an emergency and an understandingof the calibre of the civil defence and emergency servicesavailable in New Zealand.”
Over the three day weekend, visitors had the opportunity to seeemergency services demonstrations ranging from sea and rescuewinch demonstrations, aerial firefighting displays, car crashextrication enactments, search and rescue dog demonstrations,and high angle rescues.
A big hit with the younger visitors were the ”Be a Survivor”sessions run by the Ministry. The sessions were made possiblewith the help of Les Pester, Emergency Management & CivilDefence Officer from Waimakariri District Council.
continued on back page
Twenty five thousandvisitors to Te Papa overthe Queen’s Birthdayweekend in June weretreated to a range of civildefence and emergencyservices demonstrationsand displays.
2
Since our April issue of Impact we have had the CDEM 2001 Forumin Wellington, we have surveyed our stakeholders on their impres-sions of us (thank you for your responses) and the Select Commit-tee has reported back on the Civil Defence Emergency Manage-ment Bill. I have some observations to make on each of these inturn.
CDEM 2001 ForumThis forum told us that regions progressing their CDEM Group for-mation and planning are seeing significant benefit from this workin understanding relationships and hazard consequences beyondthe local event. Those regions also noted that time and energywas needed from all Group agencies to identify, understand andresolve issues particular to their Group.
Two things are clear to me – the benefit is not realised until theeffort is put in and progress does not happen until someone putstheir hand up and takes a leadership role.
AC Nielsen stakeholder survey
Amongst other detail this survey has told us three things :
• there is good awareness and acceptance of the CDEM Bill andits principles
• you see us more positively than 12 months ago but questionsome of the quality of our contact with you
• you welcome our coordination and facilitation activity ratherthan our “telling you how it is!”
Our recent restructuring is strengthening our ability to supportthe implementation of the new Act. You can expect to see a con-tinuing and increasing use of focus groups as we develop guide-
The Way ForwardThe Way ForwardThe Way ForwardThe Way ForwardThe Way Forwardlines and other documentation togive substance to the generic re-quirements of the Act.
I do not see us sitting back and ex-pecting you to get on with it – there is a shift in thinking andexecutive level buy-in required for agencies to act on the realisa-tion that they can influence how a major disaster can affect them.Our role is to promote and support that shift.
Reporting Back of the Bill
The Select Committee report was unanimous in supporting thedirection of the Bill and confirmed its broad acceptance by thesector. The Committee has addressed the key issues around Con-troller, liability and property in a manner which appears to sat-isfy most objections.
The Bill is now ready for progressing through the House and en-actment is expected over the coming months and certainly byyear’s end.
It is timely to note that 6 months from the date of enactmentCDEM Groups are required to have formed.
Those regions who are waiting to start their thinking on this willfind a substantial commitment will be necessary to meet the dead-line. It is now inevitable that this process will be happening whilelocal authorities are coming to grips with Council election results,which will only compound this situation.
The fundamentals of the legislation are now clear and there is noreason why these next few months can’t be used for preparation.The Ministry is ready to help with this as necessary.
The Ministry’s Emergency Management Advisor John Titmus will lead a project todevelop disaster assessment and coordination guidelines for the emergency man-agement sector. New Zealand’s investment in the United Nations Disaster Assess-ment and Coordination (UNDAC) has provided an internationalperspective, which will give the sector the benefit of new and provenmethodology.
The project team will consist of representatives of the key stakeholders, includinglocal government, emergency services and government departments. John saysthat he and Rian van Schalkwyk, Wellington Regional Council Emergency Man-ager, who have both completed UNDAC training are now available for emergencymissions responding to natural disasters and complex emergencies worldwide.
The Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) whichadministers UNDAC provides a world wide disaster information websitewww.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf . The site can be accessed from the Links section onthe Ministry’s website.
For more information you can email John Titmus at john.titmus@dia .govt.nz
Judy Fowler wasawarded the QSM(Queen’s Service Medal)for community servicein this year’s Queen’sBirthday Honours list.
Judy’s involvement withcivil defence beganalmost 15 years ago asa volunteer. This rolegrew in 1991 to part-time employee ofManukau City Council as
their Civil Defence Welfare Officer, which grew to full-time in chargeof welfare and training – her current role. In that role she trains andrecruits 14 teams of adult volunteers throughout Manukau andspeaks to schools, service clubs and other community/youth groupsabout civil defence. She also consults with businesses, rest homes
and hospitals on evacuation procedures. She is very active at aregional level, leading the Welfare Regional Project team and is amember of the Public Awareness Team for the Auckland CDEMG. Shealso works as a Sales Representative for Avon Cosmetics and is oneof the top four Sales Reps in her region.
A group of her Civil Defence volunteers got together and coordinatedher nomination for this award.
Judy’s extensive work in the Pakuranga/Howick area saw her receivethe Community Service Award from the Pakuranga Rotary Club in1997 and in the same year the Caltex Unsung Hero of PakurangaAward.
Judy’s reaction to her Queen’s Service award was to read the lettertwice as “this is not something ordinary people like me get”. Shefeels there are lots of people out there in the community doing goodwork but says she was lucky that someone took the time to put hername forward. She is honoured that they would do this for her.
Why does she do all this? “ I just like to do my bit “ says Judy.
The National Civil Defence Committee heldits meeting on 25 June in Wellington. Thecommittee was established under the CivilDefence Act 1983 to assist the Director witha variety of tasks, including the review ofnational plans.
The June meeting is likely to be the last timethat this committee meets formally. To markthe occasion, proceedings began with agroup photograph. The Secretary of InternalAffairs, Peter Hughes, has as one of his manytitles “Secretary of Civil Defence”, and actsas the Chair for this group. Twelve majoragencies and corporations, as well as Ministrystaff, were represented at the meeting.
John Norton, as Director, began by updatingmembers on the progress of the CDEM Bill,which had been reported back from theSelect Committee. He also took the opportu-nity to outline the Ministry’s key projects.He emphasised the need to replace inaccu-rate assumptions with clarity around respon-sibilities, especially in regard to nationalemergency planning.
Most of the meeting was directed at examina-tion of revisions to the National Civil DefencePlan. We are now almost finished with thework of updating its various parts, before thenew Bill is enacted. By the time the CDEMBill becomes law, we will have revised everysection of the plan within the last two years– a considerable achievement consideringthat some sections had not been changedsince 1992.
The key updates for this final round includethe Introduction, the Response Plan (PartOne) and the Recovery Plan (Part Two). They
Meeting of the National CivilMeeting of the National CivilMeeting of the National CivilMeeting of the National CivilMeeting of the National CivilDefence CommitteeDefence CommitteeDefence CommitteeDefence CommitteeDefence Committee
take note of the changes within governmentover the last few years, such as the transferof national recovery coordination from theDepartment of Prime Minister and Cabinet(DPMC) to the Ministry of Civil Defence &Emergency Management. They incorporate aconsiderable amount of discussion with coregovernment agencies and local governmentrepresentatives about how we explain rolesand responsibilities. For example, there isnow more explanation of the functions of theNational Emergency Operations Centre.
The principal difficulty in preparing these
changes has been the task of balancing therequirements of the existing (1983) Act withthe provisions of the new CDEM Bill. This isnecessary, because this revised plan is likelyto remain in force for up to three years – andmust work within the new legislation.
At the end of the meeting, Peter Hughesacknowledged that that this was expected tobe the final gathering of the National CivilDefence Committee. He thanked members fortheir participation and acknowledged thecommitment of agencies to the work of thisgroup over the years.
Members of the National Civil Defence Committee at the final meeting on 25 June 2001Back Row Geoff Weber (TranzRail) Steve Brazier (Health) James Dance (Fire) David Hill (DPMC) Andrew Smith (MED) Pat Helm(DPMC) Roger Crimp (Telecom) Paul Bluett (MOT)Front Row Kevin O’Kane (MCDEM) Eric Good (NZDef) Peter Hughes (Secretary, DIA) John Norton (Director, MCDEM) PaulBrennan (Police). Also in attendance: Richard Davies (Treasury) Tony Leighton (DWI)
Update on CDEM BillThe Government Administration Select Committee reported theCDEM Bill back to Parliament on 1 June 2001. Having considered80 submissions and heard 11 !s hours of evidence, the SelectCommittee had a clear idea of the issues concerning the Bill andmade unanimous recommendations for amendment.
The key changes to the Bill are:
• The addition of 3 subclauses making clear that the purposesof the Bill include the formation of CDEM Groups, theintegration of local and national activity, and encouragingthe co-ordination of wider emergency management
• Several amendments clarifying the relationship between localauthorities and the CDEM Group as a joint-committee
• Establishing two tiers of controller appointed by the CDEMGroup (the Group and Local controllers)
• Restricting the liability of local authorities for compensation• Protecting information provided by lifeline utilities.
The Select Committee’s report and the redrafted Bill are availablefrom Bennett’s Government Bookstores.
The Ministry was involved in a lot of work to support the SelectCommittee process. The Ministry team working on the Bill -MarkJacobs and Sarah Young from our Policy Unit and Leigh Hodgson
from DIA Legal -provided reports and advice to the SelectCommittee and assisted Parliamentary Counsel in drafting theamendments sought by the Committee. The Ministry team metwith the LGNZ working party on the Bill and spent a daydiscussing their submission in detail. To ensure that there was areality-test for proposals, three informal focus groups of localauthority officers provided feedback on draft amendments.
Mark Jacobs said, “The input from the field and from the LGNZWorking Group was essential in making sure that the redraftedBill can work. There was a lot of goodwill shown in getting tomeetings, respecting confidences and providing frank andconstructive comments.”The Ministry’s work on the Bill is now focusing on implementa-tion during the transition period. We have a commitment tomaintain a high degree of consultation and support. Tasks forthe year ahead include:
• Regional workshops on implementation of the Bill
• Engaging with local government and other key stakeholderson the draft National CDEM Strategy
• Updating guidance material on CDEM Group formation andCDEM planning
• Reviewing Government polices related to CDEM and updatingthem to align with the new legislation.
The new structure for the Ministry took effect on 1 July 2001.We are now organised into five business units – Policy; Capabil-ity; Readiness; Business Support; and Communications. The
New Ministry organisation structureNew Ministry organisation structureNew Ministry organisation structureNew Ministry organisation structureNew Ministry organisation structurefollowing chart lists the main functions of each of the units. Thestructure and contact details for staff are available on theMinistry website at www.mcdem.govt.nz.
DIRECTOR
Executive Assistant
ManagerCapability
ManagerPolicy
ManagerCommunications
Communication StrategyMarketingPublic education &awarenessPublic information
Advice to GovernmentMinisterial servicingLegislation & regulationsNational CDEM StrategyRecovery PlanEvaluation & resilienceDevelopment of risk andEM models
Support to sectorSector engagementStakeholder awarenessBest practice developmentCDEM group structuresSector monitoring & assessmentCommunity informationProfessional development & training
The Asia Pacific regional meeting of the International Search andRescue Advisory Group (INSARAG) was held in Seoul, Korea earlierthis year. New Zealand was represented by John Lovell,Christchurch based Emergency Management Advisor from theMinistry and Bernie Rush Wanganui Chief Fire Officer. Delegatescame from, Korea Japan, China, Cambodia, Malaysia, SingaporeIndia, Australia, New Zealand and the United Nations. Taiwan alsosent some observers.
International Search and RescueInternational Search and RescueInternational Search and RescueInternational Search and RescueInternational Search and Rescue
At the conference left to right Bernie Rush; NZFS, Mr Jin-Jong Choi, Chair of Asia/Pacific Regionalgroup last year and Chief, Search and Rescue; Mr Kwon, Hyung-Shin, Commander General CivilDefence and Disaster Management; and John Lovell.
INSARAG was set up by the United Nationswithin their Office for the Co-ordination ofHumanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Geneva andprovides the secretariat for the group. Afterthe 1988 Armenian earthquake the need forco-ordination of international support tomajor disasters was identified. Since itsestablishment INSARAG has been involved inevents such as the 1999 Turkey and Taiwanearthquakes and recently in El Salvador.
There are 3 regional groups covering America, Europe and Africa,and Asia/Pacific, with a Steering group comprising representa-tives from each of the regional groups meeting annually.
Over the last 10 years the organisation has become a world- widenetwork of disaster relief organisations developing guidelines tostandardise search and rescue operations using internationallyapplicable criteria. Methodology for teams entering affectedcountries has been streamlined and rapid disaster assessmentprocedures have been developed. Debrief information andlessons learnt from recent earthquakes have quickly beenincluded in documentation. Guidelines for international teamswere adopted at the Seoul meeting.
A roster of international teams which meet the required standardand criteria is maintained and a duty person is available 24hoursin Geneva to ensure the quick deployment of rescue teams andassessment personnel to any country requestingassistance.
New Zealand’s search and rescue capability is smalland both Bernie and John were able to give theother countries attending an appreciation of NewZealand, its border control issues such as vaccina-tion of incoming search dogs, prohibited materialsand immigration procedures. John said that mostcountries underestimate the time which it takes tofly to New Zealand, and that it could be over 30hours before the first teams arrive.
John came away from Seoul impressed by many ofthe countries represented. Korea has over 4000personnel trained with 1200 USAR specialists.Korea has the latest high tech equipment includingradar to detect heartbeats in a collapsed building.Korea, Japan Taiwan and Singapore are equippedand train for international deployment.
In Seoul, the New Zealanders took part in anexercise based on a 7.2 earthquake, 20km outsideof Seoul affecting over 20 million people. Johnsaid that this was a great experience where theINSARAG procedures were tested and it enabled the
New Zealanders to work with some of the best practitioners in theworld. They also visited the Korean rescue training establishmentwhere their hosts put on a “mind boggling” demonstrationinvolving terrorist attack, chemicals, search and rescue, helicopterrescue and a tour of the establishment.
Since 1997 John has been a member of the Australian UrbanSearch and Rescue Steering Committee. Bernie Rush has recentlyalso become a member of this committee. Much of the work beingdone by Australia in developing their capability can be applied inNew Zealand.
Benefits for New ZealandInvolvement offers New Zealand a number of benefits whichinclude:
• a knowledge of the capabilities and resources of othercountries which could be the likely responders to a majordisaster in New Zealand
• knowing the key people involved in member countries, the UNand OCHA and being able to brief them on New Zealand.
• ability to exchange information, training needs and localrequirements
• ability to work with other countries to test and evaluatesystems whilst we are developing our own plans to manageincoming international assistance
• ability to maintain an awareness of protocols betweencountries and ensuring that arrangements are suitable forNew Zealand
• developing an awareness of international agreements formilitary assistance, customs agreements and other protocols
At the conclusion of the recent Seoul meeting of INSARAG JohnLovell was elected to Chair the Group from 1 April 2001 to March2002. The next meeting of the Asia Pacific group will be held inChristchurch from 28 - 30 November 2001.
Currently the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Managementand the NZ Fire Service are working on the range of issuesassociated with New Zealand’s USAR capability. Over the next fewyears this will become a major project for the organisations.
6
The Nisqually Earthquake:Lessons for New Zealand – RESPONSEBy Denzil Duncan and Barry Earl, Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management
There was damage to the columns of the dome of the State Capital building inOlympia during the earthquake.
The New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE) andthe Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management sent aReconnaissance Team to the state of Washington in the U.S.A.following the 6.8 magnitude earthquake which struck the PugetSound region on 28 February 2001. In the previous issue ofImpact - the first of this three part series - we looked at mitiga-tion issues and the differences between the New Zealand and USemergency management systems. We would now like to draw outparticular lessons learned from the American response effort.These are lessons shared with us by those responding, togetherwith our own observations of arrangements that facilitated aspeedy and effective response.
Impact AssessmentThe organisational arrangements described in our earlier articlemean that the Information & Planning Emergency SupportFunction mirrored at each level of government, has the responsi-bility for collecting, analysing, processing and disseminatinginformation to decision makers about the disaster. The FederalResponse Plan, in their “Concept of Operations” explains, “In theinitial period of an incident, the main avenue for collection ofdisaster information should be from local sources (primarily firstresponders and other government elements), which should reportinformation to the State EOC.” The arrangement in fact is muchthe same as would operate within New Zealand for an event ofsignificant scale. Information would be gathered at district orcity level, coordinated at region and then forwarded to CentralGovernment.
What was eye-opening for us was the speed with which pre-planned Rapid Impact Assessments (“wind-shield” surveys) werecarried out by the Emergency Services. Their field “size-up”reports, together with 911 call centre incident logs, provided theEOC with good initial data on the scale and impact of the event.
Also impressive was the post-earthquake damage assessmentprocess carried out by City and County Building Departments.Pre-event vulnerability assessments meant that building inspec-tors had previously identified which buildings to inspect first –starting with the Emergency Operations Centre itself. They hadpre-prepared kits available and accessible, containing supplies ofthe initial “rapid” evaluation safety assessment forms and thethree (red, yellow and green) coloured placards used to warn ofentry/occupancy restrictions on a building.
It was also the Building Department’s responsibility to establish acall centre for handling reports of commercial, industrial andgovernment building damage. A tracking system was required formonitoring progress in “tagging” buildings, the whereabouts ofbuilding inspectors and the re-inspection process as detailedinspection reports came to hand and the status of buildingschanged.
While the participants in these processes felt everything had notrun as smoothly as they would have liked and refinements wouldbe made to plans, we remain impressed by their achievements.New Zealand local government has access to the NZSEE booklet“Post-Earthquake Building Safety Evaluation Procedures” whichcontains preparedness checklists and a response plan for Territo-rial Authorities responsible for this aspect of Emergency Re-sponse. It is questionable how well bedded down this planningprocess is in New Zealand and therefore how quickly we wouldinitiate such a response.
Response BackgroundPreliminary observations were:
SeattleElectricity - 200,000 of 350,000 users lost power immediatelyafter the quake.
Airports - Seattle-Tacoma Airport closed initially but openedlater with limited flights; sustained major damage to the controltower.
Boeing Field (King County Int’l Airport) closed their main runwayand had limited use of the secondary emergency runway.
Railways - some disruption to the Amtrack service.
Ports - cargo handling was suspended pending inspections beingcompleted. At the Coleman Ferry terminal a 30 ft crack appearedon the north pier parking lot.
Highways - several Inter-state and state highways affected.
7
The Subduction Zone quake getting a retailinterpretation
Fourth Avenue bridge, City of Olympia unusable and likely to be condemned
OlympiaBuildings – buildings on the CapitolCampus closed. Legislative Building -cracks in the dome, façade and columndamage. The Governor’s mansion suffereddamage. 19 government buildingsevacuated and red tagged pendinginspections. 27 commercial buildings redtagged and closed immediately after theearthquake. The Olympian Apartmentswere evacuated following damage to theelevator shaft and a tower collapse.
Bridges - 4th Avenue Bridge railings fellonto bridge, columns at south end showeddamage and cracked expansion joints.
Railway - line adjacent to 4th AvenueBridge and Deschutes Parkway sufferedliquefaction.
Throughout the state, roads, bridges,houses, apartments and businessessustained damage. Against this back-ground we look at the response challengesconfronting Washington State’s emergencymanagement organisations.
Response Co-ordinationThe Emergency Operations Centre (EOCs)in the affected jurisdictions went to Phase3 activation immediately. The activationlevels are: - Phase 1 – standby; Phase 2 -partial activation; and Phase 3 - fullactivation. The Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA) RegionalOperations Centre activated in support ofWashington State. Due to the time of daythe EOC activation was achieved withinminutes. The one exception was KingCounty EOC, which had to deal with aninitial loss of power, temporary loss of
communications and evacuation of theirEOC due to a suspected gas leak. So inmost instances once the shaking stoppedstaff came out from under desks ordoorways and went to work. They knewwhere to go, what to do and how to do it.They had exercised regularly and beentested in events such as the Mt St Helenseruption, snow storms, bush fires and civildisturbances such as World Trade Confer-ence riots. The Washington State EOCcarries out a similar function to our ownNational Emergency Operations Centre inthat it coordinates information andarranges additional resources for jurisdic-tions within Washington State. TheCounty and City EOCs mirror our regionaland city/district EOCs. They are theorganisations collecting information,allocating resources and responding tocommunity needs.
Damage assessment information gatheredby a range of agencies (including emer-gency services, departments of each levelof government and utilities in both publicand private ownership) was forwarded tothe relevant EOC. All EOCs had intelli-gence collection plans within which thevarious agencies carried out pre-agreedtasks. The strength of the reportingarrangements appeared to be in theirservice agreements or Mutual Aid Agree-ments. Lead responsibilities had beenassigned, as had the activities and tasksrequired of each party. Throughout theresponse period adequate resources appearto have been available to the participat-ing emergency management organisationsand no reports or evidence suggested anypressure on resources. Resource
prioritisation plans were therefore notinvoked or tested. The State, County andCity emergency management organisationsemploy full time professional staff, andprovide stand alone EOCs. To back up thepublic telephone system a statewidealternate radio communications system isin place.
Welfare activity is largely the responsibil-ity of the American Red Cross. In theevent they initially opened 9 shelters(Welfare Centres) and deployed fifteenemergency response vehicles. TheAmerican Red Cross has an active role incarrying out initial residential rapidimpact assessments and in the follow-upto individual householders. Red Cross alsoestablished three fixed feeding sites toprovide meals to relief workers andevacuees in affected areas - between 28February and 4 March they served 3,200meals. During the event 327 Red Crossstaff and volunteers were involved in thewelfare effort. With relatively fewevacuees or injured however it was clearthat the demands placed on welfaresystems were limited.
In the next issue of Impact, we will lookat the public information function andhow it operated during the event. We willalso summarise the lessons we learnedand which we trust will benefit theemergency management community inNew Zealand.
8
MedusaWaitakere City Council
Thursday the 21st of June was disaster day for the Waitakere Cityas the biggest cyclone to hit the district in 100 years createdhavoc causing numerous casualties and devastation on a scalenever before experienced.
Fortunately it was not the real thing but a major exercise to testthe city’s civil defence preparedness and response capability. Over85 Waitakere City Council staff, emergency services personnel andvolunteers took part in this 2-hour exercise.
The exercise, code-named “Medusa”, was conducted at council’sEmergency Operations Centre as part of the annual trainingprogramme.
The exercise scenario included response to chemical spills,flooding with sewage overflows, loss of power and telephones,
News on CDEM people and activities around the countryCDEM Round-up
PandoraEnvironment CanteburyMore than 900 people took part in this year’s Exercise Pandora –an annual event run by Environment Canterbury to test theregion’s Civil Defence capabilities.
The exercise, which tested Canterbury’s readiness for a majorstorm, was held in three shifts over two weekends. Staff andvolunteers from the Canterbury Regional Headquarters, sectorposts and area posts were involved.
It was the first big test for separate logistics and welfare
sections, which had previously been incorporated in the mainoperations centre. Both sections ran their own operations tablesand were managed separately.
Civil Defence manager John Fisher said liaison staff workingbetween the operations centre and the two sections played animportant role.
“Things ran very smoothly, with liaison people for logistics and
welfare working in the operations centre and providing the linkwith their respective sections in other parts of the building.”
With more space available, the sections were able bring in stafffrom other organisations with specialist skills in areas likeroading, harbours, air traffic, defence and welfare.
Another first for the exercise was the use of the GeographicInformation System (GIS) to mark locations of hazards such asclosed roads and flooding.
An electronic whiteboard system was also used to speed up theinformation flow. This meant the logistics and welfare staff hadaccess to information as soon as it arrived, and did not have towait for paper copies of information.
Environment Canterbury civil defence portfolio chairperson CrAngus McKay said that while it was the busiest Exercise Pandorato date, it was also one of the most smoothly run.
“Various improvements this year ensured we had some goodefficient processes in place. In particular, the message flow,which is so important in this kind of event, moved very quickly.We’re very pleased with the result.”
Districts involved in Exercise Pandora included Christchurch,Waimakariri, Hurunui, Kaikoura, Marlborough, Selwyn, Ashburton,Timaru and Mackenzie. Reports back indicated all districtsthought it was well worthwhile.
By Josie McNee
By Bill Morley
Marlene Harrison (left) and Janelle Mackie at work at the welfare operationstable.
Civil Defence controller John Talbot (left) and operations manager DonWethey at work on Operation Pandora. In the foreground is Anne-MarieDuggan
Media /Public Information Manager Dai Bindoff (left) briefs Controller HarryO’Rourke (CEO Waitakere City Council)
9
. . . continuedCDEM Round-uplandslip and house movement, plus road closures and a fatal roadaccident. One incident also involved 6000 chickens on the looseafter the truck they were being transported on had overturned.
The theoretical evacuation of 1400 students from the MasseyHigh and primary schools was an exercise event as the result of a
major windstorm that had devastated the Massey area. Welfarecentres were also established to cater for other areas of thedistrict.
Waitakere City’s Emergency Services Manager Heather Smith wasdelighted with the exercise. “ Quite a number of the people wereparticipating in the headquarters for the first time and copedextremely well under the guidance of the more experienced staff.We had participants from North Shore, Rodney and Aucklandcouncils and several visitors from the media, rescue personneland one irate mother who couldn’t locate her children. Over 100events were injected into the exercise throughout the 12 hoursand all were effectively responded to,” said Heather.
By special request from the Police and Fire Commanders, 22police and 11 fire service personnel took part over the 12 hoursof the exercise.
“The presence of so many emergency service staff from the Police,Fire and local Health District was a tangible sign of theirrecognition of the benefits gained by working together in thesesimulations of the “real thing,” says Heather. Waitakere City ChiefExecutive Harry O’Rourke, who was Civil Defence Controller in the
Intelligence Cell Chris Pullen (left) & Darren Cottam.
West Coast Regional CouncilHeavy rains and flooding of large parts of the West Coast was thescenario for the West Coast Regional Council’s Exercise Cascade
held in Greymouth on 15 June.
With heavy rains of 250mm forecast for the ranges, and the WaihoRiver rising at a phenomenal rate, there are initial concerns forthe township of Franz Josef (and 120 non-English speakingtourists in the region). As the situation develops, districts arestretched to the limit and evacuation and welfare assistancebecome necessary.
CascadeCascadeCascadeCascadeCascade
Regional Controller Doug Truman and CDO Vijay Narayan run throughthe exercise scenario.
Left, Techscape Manager Don Green, Controller Harry O’Rourke, District FireCommander Bill Ellis and Emergency Services Manager Heather Smith.
L to R; EOC Manager Graham Wakefield is briefed by Media Public AffairsManager Dai Bindoff while assistant Barbara Kade takes notes. Alt controllerCr Alan Davies listens in.
third shift, also paid tribute to those participating in theexercise. Mr O’Rourke was mindful of the work required to developsuch a big exercise and was impressed with the realistic variety ofevents.
New workstation name boards were installed in the EOC prior tothe exercise to reflect CIMS nomenclature as would be used in thefield to reflect the new code of practice.
Also trialled for the first time was a closed loop hands free radiofor directing staff. Four inexpensive CB radios were purchased forthe trial and proved to be an excellent tool for maintaining a linkbetween the Operations Room and Emergency Services directingstaff members and the exercise director. The use of the radiosalso saved a lot of legwork.
10
Associate ProfessorVince Neall, has stooddown from theEmergency Manage-ment Board ofStudies, after eightyears as Chair. TheBoard is responsiblefor the academicdevelopment andadministration of theDiploma in EmergencyServices Management(formerly the Diplomain Civil Defence).
Vince has been on theBoard since itsinception in 1989, and has been instru-mental in seeing the Diploma develop asan internationally recognised university -based programme in the area of disasterprevention, response and recoverymanagement. His final act as Chair was tosubmit a proposal to the Academic Boardat Massey University, to introduce a newpostgraduate subject area of Emergency
NivaNivaNivaNivaNivaBy Richard Steele, Gisborne District CouncilOn 10 June Mt Tarawera (its 115th anniversary) provided thescenario for the Gisborne District’s Civil Defence exercise. Everyfour years Gisborne activates its whole organisation to make sureit is on track to manage the “real thing”.
The mountain started rumbling late on the Friday night and wasin full eruption by 1430hrs on the Saturday. The main eruptionfinished in the early hours of Sunday morning and by that timethere was ash thicknesses of between 50mm around the Matawai,area, 30mm in the city and 15mm further up the coast.
While the declaration happened at 1500hrs on the Saturday theEOC was not fully manned until the following morning, as werethe Area Headquarters at Te Araroa, Ruatoria and Te Karaka –about 150 people all together.
While there were some response activities thrown in to keep theexercise flowing and test those procedures, the exercise wasdesigned to get the players to concentrate more on the manage-ment issues. No water or power, limited communications, limitedfuel, major social disruption, what to do with the ash and whatto do with all those people who “ran away” from the Bay ofPlenty.
The exercise also gave us the opportunity to play with the RMDsoftware in a more intense atmosphere than we had had in themillennium and its use is now going through a major review.
The exercise achieved more than we had hoped and it has alreadyled to development of a more robust decision making process forthe management team – this will be presented to the combinedBOP, HB and Gisborne Controllers training session in Novemberand the development of a new training policy for council staff.
See picture on back page.
Thank you Professor NeallThank you Professor NeallThank you Professor NeallThank you Professor NeallThank you Professor NeallManagement to theschedule for the Degree ofMaster of Arts.
Vince is widely known tothe scientific communityand the emergencymanagement sector for hisresearch as a vulcanolo-gist. Vince is currentlyAssociate Professor, andJoint Group Leader of Soil& Earth Sciences, Insti-tute of Natural Resources,Massey University,Palmerston North.
Mr Richard Heerdegenanother founding member
of the Board, replaces Vince as Chair.Richard’s only comment on being electedwas “ I trust we don’t have to waitanother eight years for another willingvolunteer!”’
Richard Heerdegen has been lecturing atMassey University since 1963, interspersedwith periods of teaching, study andresearch in Fiji, USA, UK and Australia.
. . . continuedCDEM Round-upCascade continued
Regional Controller Doug Truman said that as flooding is aperennial affair on the West Coast it was appropriate for Council
staff and volunteers to be prepared by way of exercises.
The Ministry’s Emergency Management Advisors John Lovell andWilson Brown worked with Civil Defence Officer Vijay Narayan toconduct the refresher training and the exercise. Vijay said thatthe purpose of the exercise was to hone the procedures foractivation of the Regional headquarters and to help the attendeesto acquire the necessary skills in running the various cells withinthe headquarters. Staff from the three district councils andrepresentatives from the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergencymanagement and emergency services attended the one dayexercise, which ended with a debrief session.
Richard Heerdegen
Ven with friend, during a break inexcavating trenches across the Wellington
He is a physical geographer and hydrolo-gist with a major interest in rivers andnatural hazards, particularly floods andmeteorological hazards. Richard has beenteaching an undergraduate course inNatural Hazards for over 20 years and hasbeen a major contributor to the NaturalHazards paper for the Diploma in Emer-
gency Services Management. He has alsobeen a member of the Board of Studies forthe Diploma since its inception more thana decade ago.
Operations Cell. From left: Trevor James, Toni Morrison& Peter Anderson
11
National FireNational FireNational FireNational FireNational FireFighting CompetitionsFighting CompetitionsFighting CompetitionsFighting CompetitionsFighting CompetitionsIn November locals will get a chance to seerural volunteer fire fighters from around thecountry in action. Hastings District willhost the National Rural Fire FightingCompetitions at the Hasting A&PShowgrounds on 17 November. HastingsDistrict Council’s Emergency ManagementOfficer Rick Sloman says organisers havesent out 300 invitations covering 105 ruralfire authorities throughout the country.
“Hosting the competitions will be a greatopportunity for the public to see what theteams do in training. We’re planning tohave a fun event to let people have a go. Itwill be a real family fun day with entertain-ment and food stalls along with the compe-titions.”
Each team will carry out two basic hose runsand a monsoon bucket filling exercise with ahelicopter. The teams are judged ontechnique and speed. Usually about 200volunteers take part.
“This is the official Year of the Volunteer andour organising team wants to promote thevaluable work these volunteers do in ourrural communities. ”
New approach toemergency management progressingBy Ged Shirley, Manawatu –Wanganui Region
Planning is well advanced in the Manawatu-Wanganui Region to produce a Civil DefenceEmergency Management Group (CDEMG) Plan.Work on the CDEMG Plan began in Januarythis year and the aim is to have this plancompleted, ready for public consultation, byJuly 2002.
The Plan contains a Strategic Component(which sets goals, clarifies risk, identifies keyissues, and sets objectives to fix the issues),and an Operational Component (whichclarifies the ‘nuts and bolts’ of day to dayreadiness, response and recovery). Themajority of the Strategic Component hasbeen completed by the Coordinating AdvisoryGroup (CAG) at a series of monthly work-shops; it is due to be completed and readyfor consideration by the Governance Body(CDEMG Committee) in August this year.
WorkshopsAn invaluable aspect of the planning processhas been the series of workshops attended byCDEMG members that have been held thisyear. At the workshop in May, the CAGcompleted work on analysing the currentManagement Mechanisms being used to
manage our hazards. This process looked atwhat is being done (by Local Government,Health, and Emergency Services), where thegaps are, areas of duplication, and ideas forimprovement. As a result 13 key issues weredefined, and prioritised. These ‘issues’ wereimportant for forming the basis of futureplanning.
In workshops held in June we developedObjectives, Targets and Actions to ‘fix’ theissues identified in the previous workshop.• Objectives are high level statements/aims (not specific to any one organisation),• Targets outline the various activities (ortasks) that need to occur to complete eachobjective,• Actions outline the agreed agencyresponsibilities for completing each Target.Great progress was made at this workshop.
At their meeting on 16 July, the CAGconfirmed the Objectives, Targets andActions for our CDEMG. These will form thebasis of a work programme to guide variousprojects over the next few years.
This Strategic Plan will provide the platformfor day-to-day operational planning. Once
the Governance Body has considered andapproved the Strategic Component, it will bemade available on a website that is currentlybeing developed for our CDEMG.
CIMS TrainingConcurrent with the production of the CDEMGPlan, we have also commenced CDEMGsponsored level 2 and 4 CIMS training coursesfor each district. CIMS training has proved tobe a useful medium for enhancing localintegration of CDEMG members, and reinforc-ing the new concept of CDEMG’s.
Local Government members of the Manawatu-Wanganui CDEM Group are:
• Horowhenua District Council• Ruapehu District Council
• Rangitikei District Council• Manawatu District Council
• Tararua District Council
Hastings District Council has 14 ruralvolunteer fire forces. The local PuketitiriVolunteer Rural Fire Force took away 3rdplace at the competitions in Christchurchlast year. Mr Sloman says securing thenational competitions is a valuable opportu-nity to give the local teams more experienceand contact with other teams.
“It will give our guys a chance to comparenotes with the people who have been outfighting fires in Marlborough last summer.The Puketitiri Force put in a great effortconsidering it was only the second time theyhad competed at national level. Some of theteams have been competing for years. Thisyear we will be able to enter more teams andthey will have the home advantage. Wewant locals to really get out there andsupport our boys.”
Mr Sloman says the rural fire fighters takepart in monthly training sessions and a lotof controlled burns with farmers. Each fireforce has its own local commander anddeputy who co-ordinate local training andfire responses.
SOPACSOPACSOPACSOPACSOPAC
Meeting inMeeting inMeeting inMeeting inMeeting in
SeptemberSeptemberSeptemberSeptemberSeptemberSOPAC (South Pacific AppliedGeoscience Commission) DisasterManagement organisations are holdingtheir annual meeting in Manukau City,Auckland from 5 - 7 September 2001.This will be preceded by a SOPACDisaster Managers workshop on 31August - 4 September at the samevenue.
The SOPAC Disaster Management Unitwill be sponsoring this activity for thePacific member countries. The Ministryof Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) andthe Ministry of Civil Defence &Emergency Management will beproviding representation at the Meetingand the workshop.
For further information regardingSOPAC, visit website www.sopac.org.fjor contact John Titmus
Showcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaShowcasing civil defence at Te PapaThe “Be a Survivor” sessions were aimed at raising awarenessamong kids, and parents, of the all important need to know whatto do before an emergency.
Les not only put together a session compete with audio visualaids and props that had both kids and parents involved but did it18 times over the three day weekend. Thank you Les. We couldn’thave done it without you.
Rian van Schalkwyk, Emergency Manager, Wellington RegionalCouncil said that the three days were certainly worthwhile fromtheir point of view.
“We had over 6,000 people at least come through the mobile tentthat we had set up in the amphitheatre. There was a good mix ofpeople that came through and a great deal of interest in thematerials we had on display.
“It was great the way the Ministry, the councils and emergencyservices- fire, police, ambulance, rescue - all worked as one big
continued from page one.
team to promote awareness of civil defence. It was also a goodopportunity to build on the teamwork and working relationshipsthat exist ”, said Rian.
The participating volunteer organisations were also delightedwith the weekend – many of them signed up new recruits.
Checking progress during the exercise in Gisborne (from left) Regional Fire Officer Peter McClelland of Napier, Gisborne Chief Fire Officer Bill Beale, Inspector Bruce Blayneyand Senior Sergeant Moera Brown. In the background (l-r), Jill Simpson, Controller’s PA, Bill Turner, Alternate Controller and Denzil Duncan, Ministry of Civil Defence andEmergency Management.See story on page 10 in CDEM Round-up.
LRpic
There was something for everyone over the long weekend, and opportunities to see first hand emergency services staff in action.
