National Amphetamine-Type Stimulant Strategy Background Paper

117
in manufacturing and trade difficult for law enforcement agencies, particularly in rural
areas (Schloenhardt, 2007). Domestic seizures reflect that production is smaller in scale,
unlike, for example, in the United States, where supply is met by larger ‘super-labs’
(Schloenhardt, 2007).
Modes of production detected in Australia include:
• hypophosphorous method – use of hypophosphorous acid and iodine;
• red phosphorous method – use of hydriodic acid and red phosphorous;
• ‘nazi’ method – using lithium or sodium with anhydrous ammonia; and
• P2P or Leuckart method – using phenylacetone or benzyl methyl ketone with formic acid
or aluminium amalgam.
According to the 2005-06 Illicit Drug Data Report (IDDR), the number of ATS laboratories
detected in Australia has steadily increased from 10 in 1990 to 390 in 2005-06 (Australian
Crime Commission, 2007) (see Table 6.1). However, since 2004 the number of dismantled
laboratories appears to be stabilising. As the majority of clandestine laboratories had been
producing meth/amphetamine using the hypo-phosphorous acid method (which requires
pseudoephedrine as a precursor), this stabilisation may be partly due to the restrictions
placed on the purchase of pseudoephedrine-based pharmaceutical products in early 2006
through Project STOP and other initiatives, such as restrictions on scheduling.
Methamphetamine production in Australia takes place in practically all states with
further evidence of the impact of Project STOP evident from detections in Queensland.
Queensland had the highest clandestine laboratory figures since 1997–98, however a
significant decrease in the number of laboratories detected in 2005–06 was reported
in this state, which may be attributed to the introduction of Project STOP in early 2006
(Australian Crime Commission, 2006). The IDDR reported a 42% decrease in clandestine
laboratory detections in the Northern Territory in 2005–06, while there were significant
increases in the number of detections in WA and Victoria (Australian Crime Commission,
2007). The submission from NDARC noted that there have been reports by consumers of
domestic production of crystal methamphetamine. While evidence of domestic production
of crystal methamphetamine is not documented in Australian Crime Commission (ACC)
reports, there is considerable police concern at both federal level and state level that
several sophisticated laboratories already discovered, were capable of making crystal
methamphetamine. Therefore, concurrent sustained efforts to control domestic diversion
of precursor chemicals and manufacture is needed to disrupt high levels of domestic
production that occur within Australia.