How much PSE sales is used to fuel meth labs?

I wanted to share my insight on tracking the sales of pseudoephedrine:

In a recent October 8th and 14th Tulsa World news story “Pseudoephedrine statistics stir up debate”  and ´ Legislator disputes foes pushing tracking pseudoephedrine across state lines” both stories by Wayne Greene,  I would like to point out some related information on over-the-counter pseudoephedrine sales.

 As noted in the Tulsa World news article “Pseudoephedrine statistics stir up debate”;

“Police and the over-the-counter drug industry sharply disagree about how much of the pseudoephedrine (PSE) sold in the state is being used to make methamphetamine (Meth). The cops have statistics suggesting that as much as two-thirds of the tablet sales of the allergy medicine are going to drug labs. The drug industry can point to its own statistics that suggest that less than 3 percent of pseudoephedrine sales would be needed to fuel meth labs, implying that the vast majority of the drug's buyers are using it for legitimate purposes. “

 I can see where the two sides (law enforcement and drug industry) are divided as to how much PSE sales or refused-sales is used to fuel meth labs. One side states about 66% the other 3%, that's a big difference in statistics! The method both sides are using is ok, but it will lead to differences in estimation. Both sides have to adjust for error. Between the law enforcements high end estimation and the drug companies low end estimation, lies the truth. The issue in this story should not be how far apart each side is with their estimations, the issue is; Both sides are using the wrong metric to measure the wrong outcome. Based on the cited PSE tracking data, both sides do not dispute that the increase or decrease in methamphetamine production is somehow attributable to a portion of sales or non-sales of PSE. Furthermore, both sides seem to agree that the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness with PSE tracking is also equated to the reduction in seized meth labs.

 So, why is the increase or decrease in meth labs used as the leading measurement for the state’s PSE precursor law success? I frequently read about legislators and law enforcement pointing out that the reduction in meth labs is directly correlated / associated with passing the state’s precursor law restricting the sale of PSE.

 If a federal or state precursor law is designed to limit a consumer’s illegal purchases of PSE product, shouldn’t the real measurement of a precursor laws effectiveness - be the reduction of people violating the precursor law?

It seems too easy, but the reality is, if people continue to violate the PSE law, then you need to take extra measures to restrict PSE. As you noticed, I never mentioned the words “seized meth labs”. Fact is, seized meth labs are most certainly a by-product of illegal purchases, but the purpose of the precursor law is to restrict PSE sales, not reduce meth labs...Surely, the hope of all good citizens is that meth lab reduction is a by-product of PSE restrictions.

However, one can truly NEVER measure the increase or decrease of meth labs. Bottom line, there is no bottom line. Law enforcement can not take a census of all people running meth labs year-to-year.

 “today we have identified 100 labs in our community and we seized 80.......meth lab production is now decreased by 80-percent”

I can share some insight on the current PSE tracking or prescription debate. I managed a consulting company that was hired by law enforcement to identify people purchasing excessive amounts of pseudoephedrine product (state and federal PSE law violators). One of the many things I accomplished was to conduct a 12-month study spanning July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006. The study measured three key aspects of the Indiana methamphetamine (Meth) precursor law, State Enrolled Act 444, effective July 1, 2005. The results of this study were presented at the Midwestern Criminal Justice Association meetings, October 1, 2006, Chicago, Illinois. “Evaluating Indiana’s precursor law: seizing fewer clandestine meth labs while precursor violators go unfettered”

First, the study counted the number of state law violators produced by identification of electronic and/or signing paper logging form for ephedrine or pseudoephedrine (PSE) sales and compared those counts to the number of warrants and arrests issued based on the identification of the log information. Second, the study cross referenced the quantity (count of sales and total grams)of illegal  PSE store transactions against total PSE sales (what percent of sales are getting into the hands of violators). This is what Oklahoma is trying to do now. Lastly, the study investigated if precursor law violators were in-county residents or out-of-county residents.

The study covered three meth plagued southwestern Indiana counties; Daviess, Knox and Vigo.

·         Knox County (pop.39, 255) was one of the top six (6) counties in Indiana with the most clandestine methamphetamine labs seized from 2001 to 2004. Total labs seized in this time period, 293 labs.

·         Daviess County (pop. 29,820) was also in the top ten (10) of most clandestine methamphetamine labs seized in Indiana for two out of the four years, 2001 to 2004. Total labs seized in this time period, 103 labs.

·         Vigo County (pop.101, 400) at one time led the State of Indiana in most clandestine methamphetamine labs seized three out of four years, from 2001 to 2004. Total labs seized in this time period, 565 labs.

Note: EVERY STORE IN EACH COUNTY, WAS IN THIS STUDY AND ALL “PSE” PRODUCT SOLD WAS TRACKED. To that end, if PSE product was purchased in these counties, we tracked it! 

Here is what we found:

Daviess County Indiana (pop. 30,466) – nine (9) participating stores

*          On any given month of tracking sales, my data showed that between 10 – 40% of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine product sold went into the hands of meth precursor violators.

*          In one year, Daviess County tallied 328 people that could be charged with the state’s meth precursor law.

*          The study found a moderate amount of people purchasing under the State of Indiana 3-gram a week threshold but totaling between 10-11grams of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine product purchases per month. Based on the purchase data, I estimated between 35-45 people could be added to the monthly Daviess County violator total if the new federal “combat meth act” was enforced.

*          Although no warrants or arrests for violations were made in the one-year time period, the precursor log information allowed DCSD to place surveillance on people, this lead police to numerous arrests of people for; possession, manufacturing and dealing meth.

 Knox County Indiana (pop.38, 366) - three (3) participating stores

*          On any given month of tracking sales, 20 – 50% of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine product sold went into the hands of meth precursor violators. 

*          In one year, Knox County had a total of 559 people in violation of the State’s meth precursor law.

*          Again, a moderate amount of people are sneaking under the state’s 3-gram a week limit but tallying 10-11 grams per month. Based on the purchase data, I estimated between 35-45 people per month could be added to the Knox County violator total if the new federal “combat meth act” was enforced.

*          The Knox County Sheriff’s Department (KCSD) issued no warrants or arrests on precursor law violators in the studies time frame, however, the KCSD has been extremely successful at using precursor log information which allowed the KCSD to “stop & knock” at suspect residences and arrest people for; possession, manufacturing and dealing meth.

 Vigo County Indiana (pop.102, 592) – seventy-four (74) participating stores

·         On any given month of tracking sales, 30 – 50% of monthly ephedrine and pseudoephedrine products sold get into the hands of meth precursor violators.

·         The study found that at the start of January, 2005, Vigo County had 74 stores that sold ephedrine products, which dropped to 45 stores by July, 2005 and in September, 2006, only 27 stores sold PSE products. The study found that many Vigo County stores simply stopped selling ephedrine products to stop perpetuating the meth problem.

Although this study was conducted between, July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006; a 12-month period, my Company also tracked Vigo County PSE sales since the inception of the Vigo County ordinance limiting the sale of PSE products in December of 2004.

From January 1, 2005 to December 1, 2005, my company recorded 481 meth precursor violations. From December 2, 2005 to May 1, 2006, the number of precursor violators almost doubled (718).  That's a total of 1,199 violators in about 17-months.

From December 2005 to May 2006 the Vigo County Drug Task Forced issued 100 arrest warrants for precursor violators.

In conclusion, it takes 68 grams of pseudoephedrine to make one ounce of meth. The Indiana precursor law states a person may purchase no more than 3 grams of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine products per week; it would take a person 22.5 weeks to accumulate 68 grams legally. In one year, (July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006) the three counties accounted for 2,085 state precursor law violators. The average weekly amount purchased by violators was 12.3 grams, at this rate, it takes violators 5.5 weeks to accumulate enough pseudoephedrine to make 1-ounce of meth. The reality is, 1 in 10 violators will visit twenty-two stores in one day and make twenty-one illegal purchases. Moreover, most precursor buyers work within closed social networks. These networks consist of a meth cook and three to five people networks (smurfers) to gather PSE products and other precursor supplies. Therefore, accumulating 68 grams within 7-days becomes relatively easy.

How Many People Violate Federal and State Precursor Laws?

The rhetoric consistently coming from legislators is to arrest the smurfers that are supplying the meth cook, if this was to be accomplished, to arrest all 2,085 violators in our study; arrest counts would have to average almost 6-people a day. To put this in a bigger perspective, this study used 3 out of 92 Indiana counties. If each Indiana County conservatively averaged 125 state precursor law violators a year, Indiana would have to cite 11,500 people with a C-misdemeanor. Additionally, I estimate that with the federal law in effect, the three Sheriff Departments in our study would encounter an additional 300 to 400 yearly violators to their already high state precursor law violator totals. Again, if each Indiana County conservatively averaged 125 (state) precursor law violators and 75 (federal) violators per year. Indiana would have to cite 18,400 people with a C-misdemeanor. The real story, does Indiana have this many people willing to violate federal or state law just to purchase more than 3 grams of pseudoephedrine per week and more than 9-grams within 30-days? Our research suggests Indiana does. I concluded that even if law enforcement had the ability to track store purchases of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine products and identify violators, the manpower to enforce the state’s law would leave law enforcement overwhelmed and jails overcrowded. Case in point, I found Vigo County was the only county that aggressively issued warrants based on the states precursor law and issued citations based on their county-wide precursor ordinance. In one year, Vigo County Drug Task Force issued a combined 100 citations/warrants for precursor violations and was able to conducted 35 arrests. As of September 2006, there was over 1,600 people that still need to be issued citations/warrants for precursor violation and the list keeps growing.

 Type of Product and Amount of Product Going to Violators.

I found that by subtracting ephedrine and pseudoephedrine sales from convenience stores (2-count travel packs), and sales of products that are ephedrine or pseudoephedrine liquid based , syrup based and gel cap based, the monthly percent of solid powder product sold  getting into the hands of meth precursor law violators is between 70 -85%. This means 7 out of 10 PSE solid powder products sold is to a precursor law violator.

 The Increase in People Willing to Violate Precursor Laws

The data indicated, people that violate one-time are more likely to violate again. Ninety-four percent of 1st time violators go on to re-violate. Re-violators on average violate the state or federal precursor law 3 to 5 times throughout the year. This pattern may indicate present meth prevention strategies such as; Meth Watch and Indiana’s Criminal Justice Institute (ICJI) programs are failing to reduce the prevalence of meth abuse in communities.

The Reduction in Seized Meth Labs?

Data as of 2006, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration's El Paso Intelligence Center in Texas the number of meth-lab busts nation-wide dropped more than 30 percent in 2005. Oklahoma ’s State Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Control spokesman Mark Woodward stated meth labs are down by more than 90 percent since the 2004 meth precursor law went into effect. According to a report by the Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning, they show a 90 percent reduction in Iowa meth lab incidents for 2005. According to statistics of MethWatch , Oregon , saw a 58 percent decline in meth-lab busts in 2005, Montana had a 66 percent drop, Missouri 22 percent, Nebraska 12 percent, Washington 50 percent, and Indiana had a 24 percent dip in seized labs.

 The numbers seem to point out that reduction in labs throughout the U.S is directly correlated to passing new state precursor laws. However, I found that the reduction in seized meth labs in each of the studied counties had no effect on precursor product sales. This is important to note since most legislators seem to equate the reduction in seized labs as a measurement of a state’s meth precursor law success and like to point to its effectiveness. For example: in an article posted in the Des Moines Register. Eradicating Meth: Iowa 's precursor laws take center stage. Steve King (R-Iowa) states; "The Iowa law has decreased the number of meth labs by 80 percent and resulted in 455 fewer child abuse cases." Senators, Jim Talent (D-Missouri) and Diane Feinstein (D-California) noted in the Washington Post that Oklahoma precursor law had an, “80 percent drop in the number of meth labs seized. This law works. We should copy it."

 This research study demonstrates that even with federal and state precursor laws in effect limiting consumer’s purchases, people continue to violate the law in high numbers. Shouldn’t the real measurement of a precursor law be the reduction of people violating the precursor law? In July of 2007 the Indiana State Police were required to present and deliver an evaluation to the Governor on Indiana’s meth precursor law (SEA 444) which was passed in July 2005. The SEA 444 law specifies that the evaluation is to measure the number of arrests attributable to the logging or signing of the precursor logs. If people in this study are violating the state precursor law in high numbers, and State officials claim seized meth labs are being reduced at high rate, then, what are the people who are purchasing mass amounts of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine using it for? It should be an interesting report if it ever gets produced.

NOTE ON THE AUTHOR:

Mr. James Steward was the President and CEO of P&S Consulting Inc, based in Terre Haute Indiana between 2004 -2008. P & S Consulting was contracted by 42-Indiana, 3-Illinois and 4-Minnesota County Sheriff Departments to track the sales of PSE products and provide law enforcement with information on violators. P&S Consulting was also contracted by the Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency based in Indianapolis in 2006 to assist with tracking PSE sales in 6-northern Indiana Communities.  Mr Steward is a leading subject matter expert (SME) in the tracking of PSE sales and applying the use of Social Network Analysis to group purchase violators. The above response to Mr Wayne Greene’s article is taken in part from a paper Mr. Steward presented in 2006 at the Midwestern Criminal Justice Association meetings, October 1, Chicago, Illinois. “Evaluating Indiana’s precursor law: seizing fewer clandestine meth labs while precursor violators go unfettered”

Mr Steward is currently an Assistant Professor of Research for the Department of Defense, Monterey, California.

NEWS ARTICLES:

“Database aids in tracking of possible meth makers” Jimmy Nesbitt , (February 19, 2006 )  Evansville Courier & Press,

“Cold, and allergy medicine sales rose in April”, Karin Grunden (April, 2006), Terre Haute Tribune Star,

“Sales of pseudoephedrine products still high”, Deb McKee (July 6, 2006) Terre Haute Tribune Star

“Sales of meth precursors still on the rise”, Deb McKee (July 31, 2006) Terre Haute Tribune Star

PRESENTATIONS

Steward, W. James, 2006. Evaluating Indiana’s precursor law: seizing fewer clandestine meth labs while precursor violators go unfettered” Midwestern Criminal Justice Association meetings, October 1, Chicago, Illinois.

Steward, W. James, 2006. “Vigo County Precursor law: Slowing the Consumption of Precursors in the Meth Capital of America” Academy of Criminal Justices Sciences Annual Meetings, March 11, Baltimore, Maryland.

Steward, W. James, 2005. “It’s a Family Business, Raised to Make Methamphetamine within a Southwestern Indiana Community: The Impact of Methamphetamine Offenders on the Southwestern Criminal Justice System.” Academy of Criminal Justices Sciences Annual Meetings, March 17, Chicago, Illinois.

 Steward, W. James, 2005. “The Steward Crime Network Analysis Technique; Share-ware program to be used by law enforcement officials / crime analysts to uncover concealed criminal networks.” Academy of Criminal Justices Sciences Annual Meetings, March 17, Chicago, Illinois.

 Steward, W. James, 2004 “Pursuing the Drug Kingpin: Capturing the Drug Dealers in a Nomological (Social) Network.” Midwestern Criminal Justice Association meetings, October 1, Chicago, Illinois.

 Steward, W. James, 2004 “Home Cook’n, Born and Raised in Southwestern Indiana: The Impact of Methamphetamine Offenders on the Southwestern Indiana Criminal Justice System.” Midwestern Criminal Justice Association meetings, October 1, Chicago, Illinois.

RECENTLY CITED

U.S. Department of Justice Report: Controlling Methamphetamine Precursors: The View from the Trenches  Author: Curtis J. VanderWaal, Document No.: 223480, Date Received: July 2008, Award Number: 2005-IJ-CX-0028

METHCON Group Limited Report: Solutions to the Methamphetamine Crisis in New Zealand: A Study of Supply and Demand-Side Interventions and their Efficacy. Author; Mike Sabin, May 2008.