On Monday the 15th June 1998 at 20:35 pm, a fire was reported within the Electrical Services Centre of the nearly completed Collie Power Station. The fire occurred on the +3.60m level where the 415 Volt Switchgear, AC/DC 220 Volt Battery Chargers and 220 Volt Batteries are located. Apart from the direct consequence of the fire, contamination permeated throughout the building up a further three levels and into equipment spaces and cubicles. 

The power station was under construction by the ABB-Itochu Consortium for final sale to Western Power in January of 1999. It was due to come on-line in time to meet the February 1999 peak. The fire occurred a week before the first coal burn was scheduled. 

The recovery program had run into considerable difficulties with significant disagreement between the consortium partners, Insurers, the future owners and the various 'expert' recovery companies brought in to resolve the situation. Essentially, the owners and the consortium partners were insisting that all damaged equipment be replaced and the recovery companies were advising the Insurers that most if not all of the damaged equipment could be repaired with no real technical support for their view. I was appointed at the six-week 'crisis' point post incident by the claim Loss Adjusters to clarify and resolve this technical impasse, and to draw up a road map and cost management system for the recovery effort.

My FORMAL terms of reference were to:

· Review and comment on procedures adopted by ABB-Itochu Consortium to reinstate the electronic control systems.

· Assist and advise on the scope of the repair / replacement to the electronic control and power systems

· Assist and advise on the quantum and cost effectiveness of all matters pertaining to the repair / replacement of the electronic control and power systems. 

Initial estimates of the cost to rectify the damage had risen in the six weeks since the incident from AUS$5M to AUS$15M and the recovery effort had stalled without a clear direction on how to proceed. At this point the consortium's estimate to replace the damaged equipment, their preferred option, was AUS$90m. My first and most immediate task was to complete a comprehensive damage survey of the site and to set in place protocols and procedures for the various interested parties to present their concerns. No work would proceed until this stage was completed. 

My second task was to challenge the reinstatement presentations from both sides on both a technical and future risk management basis before agreeing, in principle, to a costing exercise on the two or three most likely candidate recovery options within each operational area. As a consequence, I was able to present a carefully reasoned argument to the Loss Adjusters representing the five Co-Insurers and thereby secure the necessary AUS$50M funding for the required works. In doing so I was able to prevent a potential cost blow out and secure savings of up to AUS$40M. Needless to say my every move and utterance was subject to the most intense scrutiny from all of the consortium partners and the Superintendent (Western Power) from a technical perspective, and all five Co-Insurers from a cost point of view.

A major extension to my terms of reference was to prepare a 'Cable Status Report - Review and Scope of Works'. This was required to address 13 major points of concern without which 'work should not proceed on the restoration of cables until the coordination, processing, testing and acceptance criterion have been approved by the Superintendent (Western Power)'. 

I considered chemical, thermal and mechanical damage to approximately AUS$23M of electrical power and control cables in 6 major categories; from field signal cables through 415Volt power cables to 11kV power cables and earth straps. I had to coordinate testing of sections of cable and cable insulation with MM Cables, The Centre for Advanced Materials Technology (Monash University), Exponent Failure Analysis Associates - Boston U.S.A., ABB Site Project Manager, MPL and Unisearch Limited. As part of this work I had to develop reasoned and practical procedures for determining the extent of contamination, cleaning protocols, procedures for determining the amount of cut back required including the supervisory and documentary procedures before each cable termination could proceed. Again my findings came under intense scrutiny but was accepted on first reading and work on the cables proceeded forthwith.

At this stage my focus changed to developing procedures for the substantiation and verification of the material damage costs. This was accepted by all the consortium partners ensuring uniformity and formed a common basis to track progress against my recovery objectives. 

The plant came on-line in time to meet the February peak demand, thereby avoiding a liquidated damages claim