Tag Archives: 1080 manufacture

PCR LTD COURT CASE POSTPONED AGAIN TODAY…. COMPANY NOT TO BE CHARGED WITH MANUFACTURE OF PURE 1080

Are we expected to believe that chemicals were being processed in the Bromley warehouse (this was stated in the original news story) but that despite the chemicals in the warehouse being those used for manufacturing pure 1080, the company was NOT manufacturing pure 1080?

By Carol Sawyer

(See the Stuff article)

Unfortunately Stuff has not made clear, or understood, the difference between importing 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate) and storing the chemicals needed to make it! ( See quote).

If you are not manufacturing sodium fluoroacetate, but only importing it, why do you need the chemicals used to make it?! An important question to have asked, surely? As the article points out, manufacturing sodium fluoroacetate is not permitted in NZ. This building contained ethyl fluoroacetate, sodium hydroxide, and ethanol… the products needed to MANUFACTURE pure 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate). It also contained sodium fluoroacetate.

Quote from article: “The factory did not manufacture 1080, but stored the chemicals that could be used to make it.
Manufacturing 1080 is not permitted in New Zealand but some companies, including PCR Ltd, have permission to make cereal bait from imported 1080.”


How do Stuff know the factory was not manufacturing 1080? It appears that PCR Ltd have not been CHARGED with manufacture, which is not the same thing. Assumptions being made here.

Quote from article: “Company spokesman Steve Attwood previously told Stuff the Bromley site was “essentially a storage facility”.
What the company was doing with the chemicals was “a commercially sensitive process of delivering good pest control products”, he said.”
……What on earth does THAT mean?

The accident happened nearly two years ago and yet Unit 1, 56 Wickham St, Bromley, Christchurch has still not been decontaminated and still apparently contains these highly hazardous chemicals, as a Hazchem sign was eventually placed on the building last year and is still there. The three other units under the same roof are all leased by other businesses and an aquatic centre, where children learn to swim, is just metres away and shares the same drive-in entrance. The building is so hazardous that firemen have been forbidden to enter in case of fire! Today the Bromley court case was due to be heard at 10.00 am. After nearly two hours of other cases being heard it was again adjourned. Will it ever come to court? After WorkSafe NZ spent a year investigating this incident, charges were laid in June, 2020.
The case was due to be heard in the Christchurch District Court in mid-July, 2020. It was postponed on the day.
It was due to be heard on the 19th August, 2020. It was again postponed on the day.
It was due to be heard on the 15th September, 2020. It was again postponed on the day.
It was due to be heard on 2 December, 2020. It was postponed again on the day.
It was due to be heard on 9 February, 2021. It was postponed again today.

See original story here : https://www.facebook.com/carol.sawyer.3511/posts/2614111712202472
**************************************************************************

PS After I contacted reporter Joanne Naish this afternoon she brought the question of manufacture to her editor’s attention. The editor has therefore made a tweak. This part now reads:”The company previously said it was not manufacturing 1080 at the Bromley warehouse, but was storing the chemicals that could be used to make it.”

READ THE STUFF ARTICLE AT THE LINK:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/124183456/pest-control-company-charged-after-chemical-poisoning-leaves-man-in-coma?fbclid=IwAR3K2T3TtlHZ4O4PPx5p1jzPc-J1fSJ9k6LLATriDdjVSSEZxwRa5_1m4iI

Photo: Google Maps

1080 ACCIDENT AT BROMLEY, CHRISTCHURCH – WILL IT BE A COVER-UP? 18 MONTHS DOWN THE TRACK IT’S NOT LOOKING GOOD!

By Carol Sawyer

Richard Healey says:

“It’s a tale that illustrates an important and irrefutable point, the organisations that New Zealanders believe are there to protect them from the sort of dishonest sociopaths who are behind this sordid mess are actually only there to make them THINK that they are protected.

Where in God’s name should you start?

Where were the “democratically” elected councillors when the West Coast District Council ignored their constituents’ widespread and well publicised opposition to the use of 1080 in order to bankroll this commercially, morally and scientifically flawed enterprise?

Where was the office of the auditor general when $272,549 was slipped out the back door as an “impairment” to avoid scrutiny of what would otherwise be very questionable business decision?

Where were ECAN while all of this was taking place under their noses? The site is still not listed on their register of land use information to this day.

Where were Worksafe when this witches’ brew of toxic chemicals was deposited upwind of a densely populated residential zone without even a rudimentary warning sign in place?

Where was ANYONE when the council, in what I can only view as a barefaced attempt to slink out from underneath its responsibilities for site decontamination, sold off its shareholding at a massive loss?

Where were ECANZ, FENZ and WorkSafe when the job of ensuring that the site was made safe in a timely manner was discussed?

Where were the courts when the task of holding the, frankly despicable, perpetrators of these events promptly to task arose?

The only people who come out of this with any credit are the foot soldiers on the ground who went in to clean up this unholy mess, the ESR team, the FENZ fire-fighters and the ambulance crews and medical staff who saved the life of the worker involved in the original explosion.

Outcomes like this don’t happen through laziness or incompetence. They happen by design.”

***************************************************

Email from WorkSafe NZ forwarded by Asst Area Commander, Steve Kennedy, Fire and Emergency NZ (FENZ), to ?, January, 2020.

Here is the text of that email for clearer reading, though I have attached the screenshot too:

“Completed by Steve Kennedy Just a quick follow-up from the operation we mounted with both FENZ and ESR assistance at the Pest Control Research NZ Limited worksite at Unit 1, 56 Wickham Street, Bromley, Christchurch in June last year (Wednesday, 12 June and Thursday, 13 June 2019). The site remains sealed under WorkSafe direction and has not been entered since Thursday, 13 June 2019 the site remains contaminated and the same hazardous substances remain in situ. We continue to work with Pest Control Research for them to developed and produce an adequately robust decontamination and site recovery plan, while there appears to be some reluctance on their part to move this along. I have been ask to confirm our understand that FENZ continues to flag this site/address in your CAD systems as a contaminated hazardous substance location containing quantities of: Sodium Hydroxide [CAS 1310732 ] (solid) Ethyl Fluoroacetate [CAS 459-72-3] (liquid) Ethanol [CAS 64-17-5) (liquid) Sodium Fluoroac by Steve Kennedy”

Also attached is the email that says fire officers must not enter the building. A photo of this email is attached, but for ease of reading I have copied out the text here. It was also sent by Fire Service Asst Area Commander Steve Kennedy, again in January, 2020, and says:

“This message was sent with High Importance.

In June 2019 FENZ, in conjunction with Worksafe, was involved in an incident at Pest Control Research, 1/56 Wickham. The site remains contaminated following an industrial incident involving the manufacture of Sodium Fluoroacetate.

No entry is to be made to this building. The site report and Dispatch Safety Alert have been updated.”