Murexide
Hazard to Self
Posts: 51
Registered: 1-12-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
Ordering Chems
Hello all,
It seems the chances of getting a police visit is fairly high for importing large amounts of glassware into Australia.
I understand that the police in Australia are fairly reasonable with their visits, but it is still an incovenience I would like to avoid if possible.
But what is the risk of a visit for importing a large variety (but not large total quantity, fits in a reasonable size bag) of chemicals none of which
are Category 1, 2 or even 3? Do they confirm the identity of the chems, then check against the categories?
Also, do category 3 chemicals still require EUDs for local purchase? I was under the impression they weren’t (even acetone is category 3!), but
acetic Acid seems to. I may enquire about this.
|
|
|
j_sum1
Administrator
Posts: 6219
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Unmoved
Member Is Offline
Mood: Organised
|
|
You should read the thread, It finally happened, the police showed up. Lots of good local anecdotal information there.
I have had two police visits. Both concerning imported glassware x-rayed at customs. The first was quite reasonable. The glassware had arrived and
they merely wanted to see it and ask what I might be using it for.
The second felt more like an inquisition and happened mid evening while I was in the process of shifting house. I had not received the glassware but
they wanted me to describe what I had ordered and how I intended to use it. So, I described a Dean Stark trap. This arrived in the post the next
day. Later I realise that the item that they had intercepted was a drying tube on back-order. Because I had not identified it and justified its use,
they did not release it and it never arrived. They warned me against ordering anything else and in general spoke to me in an accusatory and demeaning
fashion.
Now I expect a visit every glass order for items that might look like bongs or are on their list (500mL+ flasks, condensers, sep funnels and splash
heads.). I tend to keep orders small. On arrival I open to check for damage and then leave them in their packaging for a week or two before taking
it down to the lab. That way if they pay a surprise visit they can. And it is at my discretion as to whether I take them to the lab to support my
explanation. I also intend to get then to sign and date my lab journal if they visit. (I did that for my first visit but could not for the second
since it was already packed.)
Chems do not seem to be targeted in the same way as glass. I guess this comes down to detection and identification more than any particular policy.
I don't think these lists are used to target anyone. Rather they are used as evidence or to press charges if they do find anything during
investigations. List 1 and 2 items need an EUD if purchased locally (but not overseas). List 1 items are not to be sold to the general public.
(Easy to see why for some of them.) List 3 requires no documentation. It is a representative list of clan-lab paraphernalia that can be used to
build a case for illicit activity. But nothing on list 3 is actually restricted. Actually, I don't think it is illegal to own anything on lists 2
and 3. But documentation is required for purchases of list 2.
Some items of note:
List 1
Acetic anhydride
Red P
Hydroiodic acid
LAH
Pyridine
List 2
Acetaldehyde
Benzaldehyde
Lithium
Magnesium
Sodium
Mercury
Formaldehyde
CrO3
Piperidine
List 3
Acetone
Chlorofoirm
Diethyl Ether
NaOH
P2O5
Attachment: Code of practice for suply diversion.pdf (242kB)
This file has been downloaded 468 times
|
|
|
Murexide
Hazard to Self
Posts: 51
Registered: 1-12-2018
Member Is Offline
|
|
I think the attachment with the categories is a fairly old document. There seems to be a more recent one:
https://ris.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/posts/2017/01/ris...
On page 77 it lists the controls / requirements. It says EUD is required for cat. 1, 2, 3 but I don't think this is actually enforced for cat. 3.
Also, even list 1 chemicals should be legal to own, I think? It is just that it is difficult to obtain, as importing list 1 or 2 chemicals is
controlled.
For example, niacin (not controlled, I believe), can be easily be decarboxylated to obtain pyridine (with easily obtained catalyst). (It is an
inefficient process, and pyridine has a repulsive smell. So I certainly do not intend on such a synthesis myself!)
My main concern is whether they are able to conclusively identify the chemicals shipped. So, for example, they can determine that a powder labelled as
such is indeed e.g tin (II) chloride and not persue further action, rather than blanket investigating a random selection of chem imports.
|
|
|
j_sum1
Administrator
Posts: 6219
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Unmoved
Member Is Offline
Mood: Organised
|
|
If you have a more up to date document, thanks. I will ckeck it out. I spent ages trawling through govt websites looking for good info. It does seem
there are considerable differences between the states.
The police are looking for prosecutable offenses. The lists are an aid to this and help to demonstrate intent. And when you consider the size of some
drug hauls that have occurred, they are just not interested in trying to stick dirt on someone who is obviously a hobby chemist. They are not above
raising a little fear though and will pursue an obvious violation if they think the case can be made strongly enough. I can think of one such case
reported on these boards. (The chemist was foolish and making analogues for curiosity's sake even though there was no criminal intent.) You are not
goung to get pinged for a bottle of acetone. You will get shaken up for a pill press or precursors and equipment with no licit purpose.
The cops are not chemists and they don't really know much about chemistry in general. They have seen lots of clan labs of various sizes and
methodologies and know how to recognise them. You do need to be obviously different from that.
As for chemical labels. This is more of a border issue than a police issue. Customs can and do open stuff for testing. But they need a reasonable
suspicion. They do not have the resources, nor can they legally justify opening every packet of white powder they see.
Like I said, I have been visited twice. And while I have nothing to hide, it is not really to my advantage to reveal too much. I invited them to
check me out tjoroughly and then put me on a list to leave alone. They don't do that. They follow leads from customs even if there are prior clean
checks. Anyway, I was sufficiently shaken by the second visit to be circumspect. As far as I can tell, it is glassware that prompts the initial lead
and the chem lists come out only if they have something to pursue.
|
|
|
Herr Haber
International Hazard
Posts: 1236
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Amazing considering your day job that you still get questioned...
Oh well, what I wouldnt give to make friends with someone working forensics for the police.
I'd send samples weekly 
The spirit of adventure was upon me. Having nitric acid and copper, I had only to learn what the words 'act upon' meant. - Ira Remsen
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
