Clarification: This story has been updated to clarify that Hawkes Bay Protein did not spill the acid.
Two firefighters wearing the wrong gear suffered sulphuric acid burns in a botched callout to a damaging spill by a supplier delivering the acid to asite near Napier last year.
People in general believed firefighters were the experts on hazardous substances, but at this spill they did not know what they were doing - and it was clear other crews also did not know, the internal review showed.
The crews of three trucks failed to neutralise the 1000 litres of “acutely toxic” acid in the January 2024 spill.
While the acid was already contained in one place, they poured on so much water it cascaded into a culvert.
The fire crews declared the spill site at Hawke’s Bay Protein Plant in Awatoto safe when it was not, and had to come back three more times to make it safe.
“We were never good at it anyway,” said a professional firefighters' union spokesperson, who said there were “plenty of other” deficient responses.
“But when we were legislated to do it, mandated [in 2017], we thought training and equipment would come along: 2017 is a long time ago and they [Fire and Emergency New Zealand] are only just acknowledging there is an issue.”
Fire and Emergency said it was creating guidance and training materials around safely neutralising spills and reviewing its hazardous materials documents.
The plant is in the area dubbed the “toxic mile” during Cyclone Gabrielle, for all the toxic chemicals swirling in floodwaters, in a major industrial area on the southern edge of Napier.
An industrial safety sheet on 98% sulphuric acid says it is “acutely toxic... extremely corrosive, irritating and toxic leading to severe burns and rapid destruction of tissue”. It is also harmful if breathed in.
The crews of three trucks failed to neutralise the 1000 litres of "acutely toxic" acid. Photo / RNZ, Tracy Neal
Among the many failings at the spill on January 18.
“The initial response to the sulphuric acid spill was poorly managed, with significant safety and procedural deficiencies,” said the 25-page operational review completed in November, and now obtained by RNZ.
The water “overwhelmed the plant’s system and allowed concentrated amounts of acid to cascade beyond the bunding and onto the nearby driveway and dry culvert that ran alongside the road berm”.
Trying to dilute that much acid was futile - it would have taken almost 150,000 Olympic pools of water.
On the first return visit on the day of the spill, two firefighters were not wearing splash suits or breathing gear.
“This decision to wear incorrect PPE led to two firefighters receiving chemical burns.”
Worksafe said that while it was notified of the incident by all involved, Fire and Emergency did not tell Worksafe about the injuries to the firefighters.
“WorkSafe was notified by Fire and Emergency and the supplier of the sulfuric acid about the incident itself, rather than any specific injuries,” it told RNZ on Wednesday.
“We took enforcement action against the supplier, and issued an improvement notice for an inadequate health and safety management system.”
Fire and Emergency said the injuries were not serious enough to notify Worksafe.
The firefighters were decontaminated at the plant - but an hour later were still there, though unable to work, before being sent to the hospital, where they were later released.
The union spokesperson said they had been raising a lack of training in hazardous materials (hazmat) with Fire and Emergency for years.
They lacked gear that could identify what a chemical was, they said.
The report concluded the problem went wider than Hawke’s Bay.
While the agency had a duty under law to be first responder, and others thought it was an expert, “our findings indicate that the organisation’s HazSub [hazardous substance] training and approach to HazSub incident response could be improved”, it said four months ago.
Deputy national commander Ken Cooper said the agency took the safety, health and wellbeing of its people very seriously.
The operational review made seven recommendations, “all of which have been met or were already under way”, Cooper said.
A safety review made another four, including further training and to build understanding how to safely manage hazardous substances incidents.
But the union said only interim measures were in place: Limited training and a change so that a crew did not try to over-reach but would work initially to contain a spill, until experts were on hand.
“This was not your average incident... it was one of the biggest gaffes... but in saying that, with the limited training that we get, it’s very hit and miss.”
As a backstop they would call Queensland’s fire brigade, who are world experts.
At the protein plant, after the acid overflowed, the officer in charge thought the dirt would neutralise it, but did not seek further information on what to do or extra hazmat resources.
“No pH testing was carried out at the incident to confirm if the acid was sufficiently neutralised,” said the report.
“The incident controller faced levels of anger and frustration from external partners that had been on the scene since [the spill] was declared safe, and they referenced the time wasted waiting for Fire and Emergency to return.”
It was a hot day on the second attempt, and firefighters did not kit up properly before putting neutralising soda ash on the acid for the first time.
They had to return again on January 26 and again on February 1 to neutralise it further.
A workshop between Fire and Emergency and union firefighters to decide on permanent improvements was likely in the next few months, the union said.
Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
