Not In Our Backyard: Research Findings on the Emerging Contaminates from Clandestine Laboratories and the Impact on the Health and Environment of Regional Australian Communities

Characteristics of Clandestine Labs

Range from crude to

highly sophisticated set

ups

Meth labs

Prevalent in residential

areas - 63.9% of

detections

Residential areas

Most commonly

manufactured drug in

laboratories

Amphetamine-type stimulants

4.1% of laboratories

found in rural areas

Rural Labs 49.5% are addict based

sites producing small

amounts for personal

consumption and/or friends

Next largest location for

laboratories was vehicles

Mobile Labs

Kitchen Labs

What to look for:

• Hot plates, deep fat fryer, camp stove • Drug press, mop bucket with press • Chemical containers or other scientific equipment • Acetone, Ammonia, Solvents, Medication Boxes,

Needles/Syringes • Windows Blacked out or Blocked. Heavy condensation

on windows and doors • High level of security. Extra ventilation • Tubing & pumps • Blue fittings on propane tanks • Strong odours, staining in drains, sinks and toilets • Burns & scorches. Large number of matches • Smoke Staining on walls and ceiling. Powder residues • Drug Paraphernalia

NSW 11.4% of these

laboratories were found in NSW

Clandestine Drug Labs Detected in Australia

2016-2017

4.7% Regional

Regional Nearly 5% of

these labs were in regional Australia

Clandestine Drug Laboratories

“Demand for harmful drugs remains robust”

Drug seizures and related charges

Waste water analysis Source: Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, “Illicit Drug Data Report, 2016-17”, July 2018

Measuring Drug Use

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Methylamphetamine MDMA Heroin Cocaine Estimated consumption (kgs p.a) 2016-17 national seizures (kgs)

Source: Illicit Drug Data report, 2016-17, p13

GAP

Seizure vs Estimated Drug Use

818

1,102

2,528

695

946

52

66

10

NSW

Vic

Qld

SA

WA

TAS

NT

ACT

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Clandestine drug laboratories detected 2007-8 to 2016-17 by state

Drug Manufacture Charges in Regional NSW

Source: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Reference: SA_trends18Q4. Accessed online March 2019.

The by-products and chemicals release dangerous vapours and residues

Chemical residues permeate all porous surfaces - gyprock walls, grouting, carpet, upholstery & fabrics.

Contamination of specific location and potentially surrounding soil, water and air

Professional clean or painting surfaces does not decontaminate the chemicals

Specialised processes, remedial equipment and substances are required to ensure the property is thoroughly decontaminated.

Large volume of chemicals required to ‘cook’- many are highly toxic and corrosive

Impacts & Risks of Clandestine Drug Laboratories

Symptoms of exposure - Acute • Loss of Appetite

• Heart Problems – Increase to heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature

• Nausea

• Erratic & Violent Behaviour

• Panic / Psychosis

• Seizures

• Death

Source: Caldicott et al, Clandestine drug laboratories in Australia and the potential harm, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, vol 29,No: 2, 2005

Link between Drug Use and Crime

Det

aine

es w

ho te

sted

pos

itive

for d

rugs

at

the

time

of th

eir d

eten

tion

07-1

6 (%

)

Source: Crime Statistics Australia, “Drug monitoring in Australia – trends in alcohol and other drug use, 2007-2016” - http://www.crimestats.aic.gov.au/DUMA/1_trends/#overallTrends. Accessed March 2019.

Impacts on First Responders • Need to have specialised knowledge of risks

associated with current and past laboratory sites

• Risks include: • Inhalation of toxic fumes and impacts on skin • Turning off cooling systems or power can increase the

potential for explosions • Hoarding of chemicals increases risks of explosion • Impact of ventilation of site on surrounding occupants and

responders.

• Emergency departments need to be able to determine appropriate treatment for anyone injured in clandestine laboratory accidents/detections

In Western Australia a ‘relatively safe’ amphetamine laboratory exploded during the final clean-up and removal of chemicals. A chemical contractor employed to remove the chemicals was seriously injured and a forensic chemist and a female police officer were also injured. Source: Illicit drug data report 1997-98

Impacts on Pets • Animals exposed to clandestine laboratories can

suffer side effects demonstrated in neurological signs including:

• Agitation • Hyperactivity • Irritability • Aggression • Apprehension

• Ingestion of large doses of illicit drugs or exposure to harmful fumes may present as severe respiratory depression. Chemical burns from fires or explosions, along with dermatologic contact with the drug on feet or hair may also occur.

Wagga Wagga City Council Animal Management Rangers John Peacock (right) and Gary Bussenschutt, Courtesy Daily Telegraph

Source: The Drug Crisis and the Potential Impact on Animalshttp://invma.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/08/Drugs-and-animals-One-Welfare-Sept-2017.pdf. Accessed March 2019

Impacts on the Environment

Leaching into the soil & water table Disposal of chemicals into household drains or into waterways – reaction & contamination Stable red phosphorous can turn into reactive white phosphorous due to poor handling or exposure to heat/light occurs. White phosphorous may to produce phosphoric acid or phosphine gas. Phosphine is a highly toxic systemic poison and death occurs by delayed pulmonary oedema. It has minimal odour and irritation making detection difficult. If in high concentration, it is explosive. Death to live stock who have access to contaminated sites or waterways.

Police Investigation – Chemical Cocktail

Longevity of Contamination • In San Diego, reports of fires erupting 10 years after the

dumping of red phosphorous had occurred - illustrates the long term impacts of clandestine laboratories that need to be managed.

• A case study in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California showed that a contaminated property left idle between 2002-2011 due to lack of funds had similar residues when tested in 2002, to those tested 9 years later in 2011 - indicating that the methamphetamine residue present on the surfaces tested did not degrade over time.

Residual Contamination Residual contamination can be in the form of solids, liquids or vapour.

Capacity to become airborne or absorb and remain in porous materials like ceilings, walls, carpets, furnishings, drains or ducting systems

Remediation or cleanup of affected sites not always adequate and following re-occupancy, where contamination is disturbed, or begins to leach from the substrate, it exposes residents to the hazardous chemicals.

CASE STUDY 1 • Presented as visually clean with

all furniture removed

• Appeared to have been recently cleaned

• No visual clues inside the house to indicate that Methamphetamine/illicit materials had been manufactured within the premises.

CASE STUDY 1 • No visual clues in the external areas

surrounding the residence to indicate materials associated with the manufacture or use of Methamphetamine/illicit materials.

• External yard area had been scraped to expose the soils below.

• Shed in the yard appeared to have been cleaned.

CASE STUDY 1 • Due to apparent cleaning,

indicative sampling was selected from horizontal surfaces which had been overlooked during the clean-up.

CASE STUDY 1 • All indicative on-the-spot

semi-quantitative assessment samples tested positive for methamphetamine residues.

CASE STUDY 1 Methodology

• All secondary intensive swab samples returned a positive result for Methamphetamine, to varying degrees, however all were above the threshold of 0.5µg/100cm2.

CASE STUDY 2 • Very untidy with rotting food

residue

• Personal items and furniture scattered throughout the house.

• Evidence of illicit drug use in the form of smoking implements and foil packets

CASE STUDY 2 • Damaged stovetop - however low readings

on rangehood indicate that Methamphetamine production was not taking place.

• No visual clues in the external areas to indicate materials associated with the manufacture or use of Methamphetamine/illicit materials.

CASE STUDY 2 • All indicative samples tested

positive for methamphetamine residues.

• All of the seven swab samples returned a positive result for Methamphetamine, to varying degrees, however four of the seven were above the threshold of 0.5µg/100cm2.

CASE STUDY 3 • Remote Regional location

surrounded by bushland, difficult for authorities to uncover

• Aerials imagery not really available to estimate size

• Breaking Bad – oratory evidence approximately the size of half of a football field

CASE STUDY 3 • Police notified Council’s EHO

CASE STUDY 3 • Chemical Waste from

manufacture of drugs, large area excavated with front end loader and placed in yard

CASE STUDY 3 • Extensive soil contamination

and potentially leaching into groundwater and adjoining creek.

CASE STUDY 3 • Could potentially have

significant health and environmental impacts.

• Fortunate for climate change

CASE STUDY 3 REMEDIATION - WHO PAYS

• Preliminary Risk Assessment – Desktop, Attending Police Officers, clues about cooking recipe/method, for an indication of predicted waste

• Site safety for drilling rigs and sampling? Explosive? Volatiles????? NASTY NASTY – Our real chemists will be busy before we even step on-site

• Duty of Care to put in sediment controls, make safe whilst there, it must rain again

CASE STUDY 3 REMEDIATION - WHO PAYS

• Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) costings are estimated at around $38K, this will give an indication for remediation action plan (RAP) and scope of works (SOW)

• Budget estimate for remediation earth/civil works, around $120K,

• Budget estimate for remediation works of structures (sheds and house) around $50K

• Budget estimate for waste disposal based on best case scenario of only 1 metre depth, around $280K

• Site Validation/Clearance budget estimate around $40K

• TOTAL high level budget estimate $528K

CASE STUDY 4 • Suspected Methamphetamine

Laboratory and Hydroponic Marijuana setup

• Information received from authorities was very brief.

• Upon arrival at the property the house had been stripped, no carpets etc

• Only visual evidence of drug manufacture was the hydroponic set up and remnants of Marijuana plants remaining in the ceiling cavity

CASE STUDY 4 • Some Indicative

methamphetamine tests showed positive results

• All swab samples were below 0.02µg/100cm2 indicating methamphetamine residues were not present in concentrations to investigate remediation

CASE STUDY 4 • Microbial Assessment to determine if the remnants of

Marijuana in the ceiling cavity were the source of fungal spores and bacterial growth due to the high humidity and large amount of organic matter associated with hydroponics

• Fungal spore counts were above the recommended level of less than 500 CFU/m3 which was attributed to general dirtiness of the property.

• Recommended property be professionally cleaned with a biocide solutions and all marijuana remnants (possible source for fungal spores) are removed.

JULIET DUFFY MSM Syd Uni MAICD Director EnviroScience Solutions Pty Ltd Juliet@enviroscience.com.au 0407 120 325