[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 798, METHAMPHETAMINE REMEDIATION
RESEARCH ACT OF 2005
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 3, 2005
__________
Serial No. 109-6
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/science
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
99-573 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
______
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York, Chairman
RALPH M. HALL, Texas BART GORDON, Tennessee
LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
DANA ROHRABACHER, California LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
KEN CALVERT, California DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland MARK UDALL, Colorado
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan DAVID WU, Oregon
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota MICHAEL M. HONDA, California
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma BRAD MILLER, North Carolina
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia BRAD SHERMAN, California
JO BONNER, Alabama BRIAN BAIRD, Washington
TOM FEENEY, Florida JIM MATHESON, Utah
BOB INGLIS, South Carolina JIM COSTA, California
DAVE G. REICHERT, Washington AL GREEN, Texas
MICHAEL E. SODREL, Indiana CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana
JOHN J.H. ``JOE'' SCHWARZ, Michigan VACANCY
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
VACANCY
VACANCY
C O N T E N T S
March 3, 2005
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 10
Written Statement............................................ 11
Statement by Representative Ken Calvert, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science, U.S. House of
Representatives................................................ 11
Written Statement............................................ 12
Statement by Representative Bart Gordon, Minority Ranking Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 13
Written Statement............................................ 14
Prepared Statement by Representative Jerry F. Costello, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 15
Prepared Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Member, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives.... 16
Prepared Statement by Representative Lincoln Davis, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 16
Prepared Statement by Representative Russ Carnahan, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 17
Prepared Statement by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, Member,
Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives............ 17
Witnesses:
Mr. Scott M. Burns, Deputy Director for State and Local Affairs,
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Oral Statement............................................... 19
Written Statement............................................ 21
Biography.................................................... 24
Ms. Sherry L. Green, Executive Director, National Alliance for
Model State Drug Laws
Oral Statement............................................... 25
Written Statement............................................ 26
Biography.................................................... 31
Dr. John W. Martyny, Senior Industrial Hygienist, Division of
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National Jewish
Medical and Research Center
Oral Statement............................................... 31
Written Statement............................................ 33
Biography.................................................... 40
Mr. Henry L. Hamilton, Assistant Commissioner, Public Protection,
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Oral Statement............................................... 42
Written Statement............................................ 44
Biography.................................................... 46
Mr. Gary W. Howard, Sheriff of Tioga County, New York
Oral Statement............................................... 46
Written Statement............................................ 48
Biography.................................................... 50
Dr. Robert R. Bell, President, Tennessee Technological University
Oral Statement............................................... 51
Written Statement............................................ 53
Biography.................................................... 67
Discussion....................................................... 67
Appendix: Additional Material for the Record
H.R. 798, Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005....... 90
Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R. 798.......................... 98
Statement of the National Multi Housing Council/National
Apartment Association Joint Legislative Program................ 100
Letter to Chairman Boehlert from John David Whetstone, District
Attorney, Twenty-eighth Judicial Circuit, State of Alabama,
dated March 2, 2005............................................ 102
H.R. 798, METHAMPHETAMINE REMEDIATION RESEARCH ACT OF 2005
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2005
House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room
2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sherwood L.
Boehlert [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
hearing charter
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
H.R. 798, Methamphetamine Remediation
Research Act of 2005
thursday, march 3, 2005
10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
2318 rayburn house office building
1. Purpose
On Thursday, March 3, 2005, the House Science Committee will hold a
hearing on H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of
2005, which would establish a federal research program and a program to
develop voluntary guidelines to help states clean up and deal with the
environmental consequences of methamphetamine laboratories.
Methamphetamine, also known as ``meth,'' is a highly additive,
powerful nervous system stimulant. Meth abuse is a growing problem
throughout the United States, and the availability of meth is
particularly hard to control because the drug can be cheaply and easily
manufactured in small clandestine laboratories, which are located
primarily in motels, rental apartments and other residential settings.
While the greatest and most obvious impacts of meth are on those who
use the drug, meth labs may also harm those who come in contact with
them, even after a lab is abandoned. The toxic brew involved in
manufacturing meth can harm innocent parties, including first
responders (such as firefighters who may become involved if a lab
catches on fire--a not unusual occurrence because the chemicals used to
make meth are volatile), future inhabitants of a former lab site
(because chemicals may contaminate a site), and others through the
environment (because chemicals may be poured down drains or otherwise
enter the environment). According to the National Alliance for Model
State Drug Laws, a federally-funded, nonprofit organization,
environmental cleanup and remediation of residential meth labs is a top
issue for many State and local governments. (Cleanup refers to the
initial removal of visible chemicals and equipment from a meth lab;
remediation refers to dealing with residual contamination.)
On February 15, 2005, Ranking Member Bart Gordon, Congressman Ken
Calvert and Chairman Sherwood Boehlert introduced H.R. 798, the
Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005. A summary of the bill
is included in this charter.
2. Witnesses
Mr. Scott Burns is the Deputy Director for State and Local Affairs at
the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Prior
to his appointment, Mr. Burns served as County Attorney in Iron City,
Utah for 16 years.
Ms. Sherry Green is the Executive Director for the National Alliance
for Model State Drug Laws (the Alliance) in Alexandria, VA.
Dr. John Martyny is a Certified Industrial Hygienist and an Associate
Professor at the National Jewish Medical and Research Center (NJMRC) in
Denver, CO. Dr. Martyny is the Principal Investigator on a project to
determine the exposures to law enforcement, fire and hazardous
materials officers investigating methamphetamine laboratories.
Mr. Henry Hamilton is the Assistant Commissioner for Public Protection
at the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Mr. Gary Howard is the Sheriff of Tioga County in upstate New York.
Dr. Robert Bell is the President of Tennessee Technological
University in Cookeville, TN.
3. Overarching Questions
The hearing will address the following overarching questions:
What are the environmental and the human health risks
associated with former methamphetamine laboratories? When is
the site of a former methamphetamine laboratory, be it a
private home, an apartment or a hotel, considered ``clean''?
What are the obstacles to the effective cleanup and
remediation of former methamphetamine laboratories? What
policies or regulations currently guide the cleanup and
remediation of these sites?
Is there a role for the Federal Government in
facilitating the cleanup and remediation of former meth labs?
Is that role adequately addressed in H.R. 798?
4. Background
Methamphetamine, also known as ``meth,'' ``speed,'' or ``crank,''
is a powerful stimulant that initially increases wakefulness and
physical activity but can also induce symptoms ranging from extreme
nervousness and hyperactivity to convulsions and irreversible brain
damage. Chronic use increases drug tolerance and deepens dependence,
requiring users to take higher doses more frequently. This frequently
results in amphetamine psychosis, a condition characterized by extreme
paranoia and bizarre, violent behavior--a key factor in the death of
most meth addicts. Since the 1970s, federal regulations have limited
the legal uses of meth to the treatment of a handful of conditions. Use
of meth without a prescription and the manufacture of meth without
appropriate permission is illegal under federal law.
The current meth abuse problem originated in California and the
Southwest, where organized drug trafficking groups sold the drug. But
the problem has spread considerably, with that spread facilitated by
the proliferation of small labs that produce the drug for personal use
and local distribution. In 1993, the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA) estimated a total seizure of 218 meth labs. In 2003, federal,
State and local law enforcement officers netted over 10,000 labs and,
in 2004, almost 15,000 labs were seized. These small labs account for
the majority of seizures, and they are present in every state in the
U.S., taxing the resources of local law enforcement.
Of the 32 chemicals that can be used in varying combinations to
make or ``cook'' meth, one-third are extremely toxic and many are also
reactive, explosive, flammable, and corrosive. Nearly one in five labs
is found because of fire or explosion, injuring or killing the
individuals involved as well as the law enforcement or firefighters who
respond. During use and production, meth itself and other harmful
chemicals are released into the air and deposited throughout the
surrounding area. Inside, these chemicals collect on countertops and
floors, and they are absorbed into furnishings, carpets and walls. In
addition, for every pound of meth produced, approximately five to six
pounds of toxic byproducts remain. This waste is frequently poured down
drains or spilled onto the ground, potentially contaminating soil,
surface water, groundwater, and septic systems.
Small meth labs can be set up nearly anywhere--fields, woods,
cars--but roughly two-thirds of the labs are found in inhabited houses.
A typical lab requires little in the way of materials, only glassware,
hoses, a heat source and some old coffee filters. In addition, the
ingredients used to manufacture meth are commercially available
anywhere in the U.S. The main ingredient, ephedrine or pseudoepherine,
is a chemical that is present in many over-the-counter cold and asthma
medications, and the other chemicals are available in gasoline, rubbing
alcohol, pool-cleaning supplies, drain cleaners, fertilizer and
matchbooks. Moreover, the process itself requires almost no technical
knowledge, involving nothing more complicated that mixing and
siphoning, and the recipe--as well as step-by-step instructions--is
freely and easily available on the Internet.
The cleanup following the discovery of a meth lab can be an
expensive and involved process. Cleanup is generally responsibility of
State and local governments.
States and localities have different statutes and regulations
relating to the cleanup and remediation of meth labs, but generally
cleanup and remediation occur in distinct phases. The first phase is
the initial cleanup of gross contamination, which includes the removal
of illicit laboratory equipment, chemicals and obviously contaminated
furnishings. Since meth labs are crime scenes, law enforcement is
typically first to respond, securing evidence and overseeing phase one
cleanup activities.
After a site has been secured and is no longer part of a criminal
investigation, the second phase of the cleanup begins--the remediation
of harder to identify residual contamination. At this phase, property
owners are notified and responsibility passes to them, often with a
recommendation to contact a contractor. There are no national
guidelines or regulations on how to clean up a residential meth lab for
reoccupation. States struggle to protect the public and to find an
answer that is practical for property owners; their responses range
from doing almost nothing to complete demolition. However, most
remediation efforts involve one or more of the following measures:
ventilation, encapsulation or sealing of interior surfaces, removal of
drywall, decontamination of ventilation or wastewater systems, and
removal of soil or treatment of contaminated groundwater.
Even where State and local regulations or ordinances exist, states
and localities usually do little to enforce cleanup rules. Some public
health officials try to force reluctant owners by threatening
condemnation of the property. Cleanup is expensive; the cost to
remediate a 1,500 square foot rambler can range from $5,000-$15,000,
and most insurance companies exclude ``contamination'' and ``felony
activities'' from coverage for private homes and some commercial
properties. Individuals buying or moving into a property that was
previously a meth lab may have no way of knowing that their new
residence was once a meth lab and the attendant risks.
Seven states have established by statute, regulation or guideline a
risk-based decontamination standard specific to meth.\1\ But there is a
great deal of debate over what standard is appropriate. Should the
standard be based on risk to human health (and, if so, what level of
risk is appropriate) or be based on the feasibility of cleaning up a
site, or some mix of the two? How should one determine the risk
associated with a meth ingredient that might be around a typical
household for legitimate purposes? The questions are further
complicated by the lack of research on the long-term health effects of
former meth labs. Much of the research that does exist on meth
ingredients is based on occupational exposures that occur when meth's
precursor chemicals are used for legitimate industrial purposes. Those
uses are unlikely to produce the short-term exposures to high
concentrations of these chemicals that can occur in meth production.
Little is also known about the consequences of long-term exposure to
the traces of chemicals that individuals, including children, may
receive from living in a former meth lab, although cases of lingering
health effects from such exposures have been reported.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The seven states with the risk-based decontamination standard
for meth are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota, Tennessee
and Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most states have little to no funding to conduct research on meth
cleanup. The National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws has pushed for
a federal program of research to validate sample collection methods,
identify primary and persistent chemicals of concern, determine the
most effective remediation techniques for particular surfaces (e.g.,
porous and nonporous), and help develop assessment and remediation
guidance for states and localities based on short- and long-term health
effects. A federal program could also aid in the development of field
tests kits for meth and other hazardous chemicals--another pressing
need.
5. Section-by-Section Description of H.R. 798
Section 1. Short title.
The Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005
Section 2. Findings.
Section 3. Voluntary Guidelines.
Requires the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development
at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in consultation with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to establish,
within one year, voluntary guidelines for the remediation of former
methamphetamine labs, including guidelines for preliminary site
assessments and the remediation of residual contaminants.
Requires that, in developing the guidelines, the Assistant
Administrator consider relevant standards, guidelines and requirements
in federal, State and local laws and regulations; the varying types and
locations of former methamphetamine labs; and expected costs.
The voluntary guidelines are to be used to assist State and local
governments. Requires the Assistant Administrator to work with State
and local governments and other relevant non-federal agencies and
organizations, including through the conference required by section 5,
to promote and encourage the appropriate adoption of the voluntary
guidelines.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to periodically update the
voluntary guidelines, in consultation with states and other interested
parties, to incorporate research findings and other new knowledge.
Section 4. Research Program.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to establish a research
program of research to support the development and revision of the
voluntary guidelines in section 3. Requires research to:
identify methamphetamine laboratory-related chemicals
of concern,
assess the types and levels of exposure to chemicals
of concern that may present a significant risk of adverse
biological effects,
better address biological effects and minimize
adverse human exposures,
evaluate the performance of various methamphetamine
laboratory cleanup and remediation techniques, and
support other priorities identified by the Assistant
Administrator in consultation with states and others.
Section 5. Technology Transfer Conference.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to convene within 90 days of
the date of enactment, and every third year thereafter, a conference of
State agencies and other individuals and organizations involved with
the impacts of former methamphetamine laboratories. The conference
should be a forum for the Assistant Administrator to provide
information on the voluntary guidelines and the latest findings of the
research program, as well as an opportunity for the non-federal
participants to provide information on their problems, needs and
experiences with the voluntary guidelines.
Requires the Assistant Administrator within three months of each
conference to submit a report to Congress that summarizes the
proceedings of the conference, including any recommendations or concern
raised and a description of how the Assistant Administrator intends to
respond to them. Requires the report to be made widely available to the
general public.
Section 6. Residual Effects Study.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to enter into an arrangement
with the National Academy of Sciences within six months of the date of
enactment to study the status and quality of research on the residual
effects of methamphetamine laboratories. Requires the study to identify
research gaps and recommend an agenda for the research program in
section 4. Requires the study to focus on the need for research on the
impact of methamphetamine laboratories on residents of buildings where
labs are or were located, with particular emphasis on the biological
effects on children and on first responders.
Section 7. Methamphetamine Detection Research and Development Program.
Requires the Director of NIST, in consultation with the Assistant
Administrator, to support a research program to develop new
methamphetamine detection technologies, with emphasis on field test
kits and site detection and appropriate standard reference materials
and validation procedures for methamphetamine detection testing.
Section 8. Savings Clause.
Provides that nothing in the Act shall be construed to change the
regulatory authority of EPA.
Section 9. Authorization of Appropriations.
Authorizes $3 million for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009
for EPA. Authorizes $1.5 million for each of fiscal years 2006 through
2009 for NIST.
6. Current Federal Response on Cleanup and Remediation
In October 2004, the White House Office of National Drug Control
Policy (ONDCP), in cooperation with the Drug Enforcement
Administration, the Department of Justice Criminal Division's Narcotic
and Dangerous Drug Section, and various components of the Department of
Health and Human Services, released The National Synthetic Drugs Action
Plan. With respect to the cleanup and remediation of former meth labs,
the plan calls on federal agencies to:
Ensure adequate funding for clandestine laboratory
and dumpsite cleanups, including funding for sufficient
personnel to support laboratory cleanups and hazardous waste
disposal, so that cleanup costs are not a disincentive to lab
investigations or takedowns. Federal officials, in
collaboration with State agencies, should conduct a needs
assessment to identify potential program improvements and make
recommendations on specific support needed and funds required;
and
Disseminate and apply the latest guidelines for the
cleanup of meth labs and, where necessary, coordinate
environmental remediation by appropriate entities. These
protocols for the adulteration and destruction of precursor and
essential chemicals, glassware, and meth waste should be part
of certification training.
EPA
EPA can use the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA), better known as the Superfund, to respond
to environmental and health threats, including those posed by meth
labs. However, the human health and environmental threat posed by small
labs seldom rises to the necessary level to trigger a Superfund
cleanup. On the other hand, if a ``superlab'' produced a large amount
of chemicals that were dumped into a river or onto public grounds, a
Superfund response might be triggered. A few former meth labs have
become Superfund sites.
In addition to EPA cleanup under Superfund, the Agency provides
training for State and local responders, and it offers a wide range of
technical and management courses designed to help responders identify
and deal appropriately with hazardous substances.
Department of Justice: DEA and COPS
DEA is more frequently involved in the phase one cleanup of meth
labs than is EPA, but the extent of involvement can vary by state.
Typically, DEA is involved in the initial cleanup of large
``superlabs'' because they are often associated with large-scale drug
trafficking operations. To aid in this effort, the DEA administers the
Hazardous Waste Cleanup Program, to fund and contract for the cleanup
of seized drug labs.
The DEA Cleanup program is funded through the Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) program. The Hazardous Waste Cleanup Program
received about $20 million in FY04, the last year for which figures
were available. In addition, in FY04 DEA spent about $4 million on
additional lab cleanups and almost $2 million on grants to states to
purchase lab cleanup equipment. Finally, DEA's Office of Training
conducts numerous training sessions to ensure the safe and efficient
cleanup of meth lab hazardous waste.
7. Witness Questions
The invitation letters asked the witnesses to address the following
questions in their testimony:
Questions for Mr. Burns:
What is the extent of the methamphetamine problem,
including what we know about who is using it, where it comes
from and the impact on local communities, including the lasting
health and environmental effects of former laboratories?
How does the Federal Government support State and
local agencies in the removal of hazardous waste and the
remediation of former laboratories?
What are the principle findings and recommendations
in the National Synthetic Drug Action Plan with respect to the
cleanup and remediation of former methamphetamine laboratories?
Are the findings and recommendations adequately addressed in
H.R. 798?
Questions for Ms. Green:
What is the National Alliance for Model State Drug
Laws? How does your organization work with states to develop
model drug laws? And how did your organization get involved in
issues related to the cleanup and remediation of former
methamphetamine laboratories?
What is the status of State law with respect to
methamphetamine cleanup and remediation? How are
methamphetamine laboratories currently cleaned and remediated?
Who is performing these activities and what challenges do they
face?
Is there a need for federal guidance and research on
the assessment, cleanup and remediation of residential
methamphetamine labs? If so, are these needs adequately
addressed in H.R. 798?
Questions for Dr. Martyny:
How are harmful chemicals and residuals distributed
during the manufacture of methamphetamine? What happens to
these chemicals after production has ceased? And what do we
know about the effectiveness of cleaning techniques?
What are the principal findings of your research on
the effects of harmful chemicals and residuals to first
responders investigating residential methamphetamine
laboratories? What are the health effects for children present
within homes that are used to produce methamphetamine? And what
are the health hazards associated with active and former
methamphetamine laboratories, particularly over the long-term?
Where are the limitations of the current research on
the health exposures to these residential laboratories? Are
unmet research needs currently and adequately being addressed
by non-federal organizations and agencies? If not, what is the
federal role in meeting these needs?
Questions for Mr. Hamilton:
What agencies, federal, State or local, currently
respond to a residential methamphetamine laboratory? How are
these laboratories assessed and cleaned? What, if any, State
laws or regulations guide this process? And what are the
limitations of these State laws and regulations?
How are the residual contaminants of these
residential labs remediated? What happens if property owners
are unable or unwilling to remediate these properties?
What guidance or other assistance do you need in
terms of chemicals involved, health hazards, and effective
remediation strategies? Does the Federal Government have a role
to play in these areas? If so, is it adequately addressed in
H.R. 798?
Questions for Mr. Howard:
When did New York first notice an emerging
methamphetamine problem, both in terms of the number of users
and the number of laboratories? What is the estimated scope of
the problem today? And how has that affected your state,
particularly in terms of law enforcement?
What agencies, federal, State or local, currently
respond to a residential methamphetamine laboratory? How are
these laboratories assessed, cleaned and remediated? And what,
if any, State laws or regulations guide this process?
What precautions do you take when during the raid of
a known meth lab? What guidance do you need in terms of
chemicals involved, health hazards (both in terms of first
responders and current and future residents), and effective
remediation strategies? Does the Federal Government have a role
to play in these areas? If so, is it adequately addressed in
H.R. 798?
Questions for Dr. Bell:
When did Tennessee first notice an emerging
methamphetamine problem, both in terms of the number of users
and the number of laboratories? What is the estimated scope of
the problem today? And how has that affected your state?
What agencies, federal, State or local, currently
respond to a residential methamphetamine laboratory? How are
these laboratories currently assessed, cleaned and remediated?
What, if any, state laws or regulations guide this process? And
what are the limitations of these assessment and remediation
strategies?
How has Tennessee Technological University
collaborated with law enforcement and local hospitals on the
detection and remediation of former methamphetamine labs? What
research, guidance or tools is needed to address the
environmental and health hazards of residential methamphetamine
laboratories? Are these needs adequately addressed in H.R. 798?
Chairman Boehlert. The Committee will come to order.
I want to welcome everyone here this morning for a hearing
on one of the most disturbing trends in contemporary culture:
the growing abuse of methamphetamines, or meth, or crank, or
whatever you want to call it. By any other name, it is just as
foul.
Meth is a particular menace because it combines
characteristics that are not usually exhibited by a single
drug. Abused drugs tend either to be cheap, but not so potent;
or highly potent, but relatively expensive. But meth is a
powerful, addictive, and deadly drug that is also inexpensive
to buy or to make and is readily accessible. Worse still, it
destroys families and communities in areas that have been
somewhat immune to the worst of the Nation's previous drug
epidemics. What the crack epidemic was to the Nation's cities,
the meth epidemic is to our rural areas.
Unfortunately, I have been able to witness to this in my
own Congressional District. While New York has not been a
center of meth abuse, it started in the West Coast and has
moved gradually but now rapidly eastward, the problem is
growing exponentially. And Tioga County in my Congressional
District has seen more meth lab busts than any other county in
the Empire State. We are privileged to have with us today Tioga
County's Sheriff, Gary Howard, and I know that he will describe
the devastation and challenges this is causing and presenting.
There are many aspects of the meth problem, and many things
that must be done to combat it: strengthening law enforcement,
improving treatment, and broadening education programs, to name
just a few. But there is another insidious aspect of meth, and
that is its environmental effects, which can harm individuals
who have no connection whatsoever with making or using the
drug: the innocents.
It is that aspect of the meth problem that falls in our
jurisdiction and that we will focus on today.
The manufacture, or ``cooking'' of meth uses readily
available, but highly dangerous chemicals. That toxic brew can
spread its own devastation as firefighters are exposed to it,
as chemicals are dumped into the environment and as new people
move into the site of former meth labs. And the labs are not
those white coat, Bunsen burner, test tube types of things that
we are usually familiar with here in the Science Committee.
Maybe a motel room or a third floor apartment or a trailer.
Labs are easy to create.
But we know very little about how much damage results from
this aspect of the meth problem or about how to clean up and
remediate former meth labs. States are struggling with this
problem with little information.
That is why I was pleased to be an original cosponsor on
the bill Mr. Gordon and Mr. Calvert have introduced, H.R. 798,
which takes aim at this problem. And let me point out that I
congratulate Mr. Gordon and Mr. Calvert for the bipartisan
leadership they are providing. It is a sensible, targeted bill
that we have all worked on together, and I hope we can report
it out of Committee later this month. We want to put this on a
fast track.
The bill would bring the resources and expertise of the
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology to bear on the environmental aspects
of the meth problem. States would then have some guidance as
they decide how to protect first responders and how to clean up
and remediate meth labs to protect so many more in the innocent
public at large.
I look forward to hearing our witnesses today, including my
fellow New Yorkers, and I look forward to seeing this bill move
forward rapidly.
I want to yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Calvert,
the co-sponsor of H.R. 798. I congratulate him on his
leadership on this issue. And then we will go to the prime
motivater of this whole endeavor, Mr. Gordon, the Ranking
Member from Tennessee.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Boehlert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert
I want to welcome everyone here this morning for a hearing on one
of the most disturbing trends in contemporary culture--the growing
abuse of methamphetamines, or meth.
Meth is a particular menace because it combines characteristics
that are not usually exhibited by a single drug. Abused drugs tend
either to be cheap, but not so potent; or highly potent, but relatively
expensive. But meth is a powerful, addictive and deadly drug that is
also inexpensive to buy or to make and is readily accessible. Worse
still, it is destroying families and communities in areas that have
been somewhat immune to the worst of the Nation's previous drug
epidemics. What the crack epidemic was to the Nation's cities, the meth
epidemic is to our rural areas.
Unfortunately, I have been able to witness this in my own District.
While New York has not been a center of meth abuse, the problem is
growing exponentially. And Tioga County in my District has seen more
meth lab busts than any other county in the State. We have Tioga
County's Sheriff, Gary Howard, with us today, and I know he will
describe the devastation this is causing.
There are many aspects of the meth problem, and many things that
must be done to combat it--strengthening law enforcement, improving
treatment, and broadening education programs, to name a few. But there
is another insidious aspect of meth, and that's its environmental
effects, which can harm individuals who have no connection whatsoever
with making or using the drug.
It's that aspect of the meth problem that falls in our jurisdiction
and that we will focus on today.
The manufacture, or ``cooking'' of meth uses readily available, but
highly dangerous chemicals. That toxic brew can spread its own
devastation as firefighters are exposed to it, as chemicals are dumped
into the environment, as new people move into the site of former meth
labs.
But we know very little about how much damage results from this
aspect of the meth problem, or about how to clean up and remediate
former meth labs. States are struggling with this problem with little
information.
That's why I was pleased to be an original co-sponsor on the bill
Mr. Gordon and Mr. Calvert introduced, H.R. 798, which takes aim at
this problem. It is a sensible, targeted bill that we have all worked
together on, and I hope we can report it out of Committee later this
month.
The bill would bring the resources and expertise of the
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Standards
and Technology to bear on the environmental aspects of the meth
problem. States would then have some guidance as they decide how to
protect first responders, and how to clean up and remediate meth labs.
I look forward to hearing our witnesses today, including my two
fellow New Yorkers. And I look forward to seeing this bill move forward
rapidly.
I want to yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Calvert, the co-
sponsor of H.R. 798. I congratulate him on his leadership on this
issue.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I am certainly proud to join you as an original co-
sponsor to Mr. Gordon's bill, H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine
Remediation Research Act of 2005.
Mr. Gordon, I certainly thank you for bringing this very
important issue to the Committee's attention. I know the
Committee's Majority and Minority staffs have worked together
since last year to develop and revise this legislation.
As Co-Chairman of a 100-plus member Congressional Caucus to
Fight and Control Methamphetamine, I know of the growing meth
problem in this nation and show no deference--I know it shows
no deference to District or party lines. This is an issue
everyone can agree is wreaking havoc on our communities across
the Nation.
As mentioned by the Chairman and Ranking Member, H.R. 798
focuses its efforts on procedures and standards needed to
decontaminate a site where methamphetamine is found so our
communities can more thoroughly remediate these sites, which
will protect our citizens and ensure the health of the
environment. In my area in Riverside, California,
methamphetamine production has reached epidemic proportions,
with many of these labs having the distinction of being labeled
``super labs.'' These labs are capable of producing over 10
pounds of finished meth per batch. One such lab was seized in
2003 operating out of a barn in a rural area in Riverside
County, producing over 6,000 pounds of finished product with a
street value of over $33 million. Over four million pounds of
contaminated toxic soil had to be removed with heavy equipment,
costing in excess of $226,000. Officials from the California
Department of Toxic Substance Control has called this the most
difficult and costly methamphetamine lab cleanup in
California's history.
So as you can see, this is a distressing issue which our
region, and quite frankly most of America, is becoming all too
familiar with. Our State and local agencies need all of the
resources and tools we can provide them in their efforts to
address this problem.
I am well aware that much more needs to be done to win this
fight against this devastating drug, I am optimistic that this
legislation will be a good start in that fight and will be
welcomed by our communities.
I certainly want to thank the witnesses for being here
today. I look forward to hearing your testimony. I am sure you
will enlighten us on the severity of this current
methamphetamine remediation problem and hope you will provide
us with some constructive advice and feedback for our
legislation.
I am surely proud of this Science Committee for doing its
part to fight drug addiction and specifically methamphetamine
and those aspects that fall within our committee's
jurisdiction. And I certainly want to thank Bart Gordon for his
good work in this legislation, and I want to again thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Calvert follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Ken Calvert
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, I am proud to have joined you as an original sponsor
to Mr. Gordon's bill--H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine Remediation
Research Act of 2005. Mr. Gordon, I thank you for bringing this very
important issue to the Committee's attention. I know the Committee's
Majority and Minority staffs have diligently worked together since last
year to develop and revise this legislation.
As a Co-Chairman of 100+ member Congressional Caucus to Fight and
Control Methamphetamine, I know the growing meth problem in this nation
shows no deference to district or party-line. This is an issue everyone
can agree is wreaking havoc on our communities across the Nation. As
mentioned by the Chairman and Ranking Member, H.R. 798 focuses its
efforts on the procedures and standards needed to decontaminate a site
where a methamphetamine lab is found so our communities can more
thoroughly remediate these sites which will protect our citizens and
ensure the health of the environment.
In my area of Riverside, California, methamphetamine production has
reached epidemic proportions with many of these labs having the
distinction of being labeled superlabs--these are labs that are capable
of producing over ten pounds of finished methamphetamine per batch. One
such lab which was seized in 2003 operated out of a barn in a rural
area of Riverside County and produced over 6,000 pounds of finished
product with a street resale value of over $33 million dollars. Over
four million pounds of contaminated toxic soil had to be removed with
heavy equipment, costing in excess of $226,000. Officials from the
California Department of Toxic Substance Control has called this the
most difficult and costly methamphetamine lab clean up in California's
history.
So as you can see this is a distressing issue which my region, and
quite frankly, most of America is becoming all too familiar with. Our
State and local agencies need all the resources and tools that we can
provide them with in their efforts to address this problem. Although we
are all aware that much more needs to be done to win the fight against
this devastating drug, I am optimistic H.R. 789 will be a good start in
that fight and will be welcomed by our communities.
I thank the expert witnesses for being here today and I look
forward to hearing your testimony. I trust you will further enlighten
us all on the severity of the current methamphetamine remediation
problem and hope you will provide us with some constructive feedback on
our legislation.
I am truly proud that the Science Committee is doing its part in
the fight against methamphetamine by tackling those aspects that fall
within our committee's jurisdiction. And with that I want to thank Mr.
Gordon again and thank you Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Calvert. And
that is a nice segue into recognizing the Ranking Minority
Member of the Committee, Mr. Gordon from Tennessee, who has
provided leadership for the entire Committee and, indeed, the
Congress on this very important issue that is below the radar
screen for an awful lot of people. And we are going to do our
level best, as a team up here, Republicans and Democrats alike,
to educate our colleagues in the Congress and to get moving
with the appropriate federal response to the issue.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As usual, I concur with your opening statement, not only
your nice statements about me, but the substance of this issue.
And I want to join you in welcoming our witnesses today and
Representative Ken Calvert, thank you again for your work and
your staff's work in helping us bring this H.R. 798, the
Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005, before us.
And I am pleased that we are getting started on this early.
I think we will see this, as was mentioned, early on in this
session.
Meth abuse is an insidious problem that is spreading
rapidly across our country. The meth epidemic destroys families
and communities, leaving in its wake overtaxed law enforcement
authorities, overburdened child service agencies, and toxic
dumps wherever meth is produced.
Last year, more than 17,000 meth labs were seized
nationwide. In my home State of Tennessee, law enforcement
authorities seized nearly 1,200 labs and more than 700 children
were placed in state custody as a result of meth lab seizures.
Now let me tell you about the children.
The addiction to methamphetamine is so great that it
overshadows the parental instincts. And so when a meth lab is
created in a home, children aren't shielded at all from this.
And so when the law enforcement agencies go in and take the
parents away, they wind up also having to take the children to
a foster home. Now that is a $25,000 or so bill sent to the
taxpayer, but more than that, what happens is that those
children have to leave their toys and their clothes behind,
because they are so toxic. They are put in something called a
bunny suit, taken to a hospital with an attempt to try to
decontaminate them, but we really don't know what the long-term
effects are. Health-wise we don't know the effects, but we
certainly know having to grow up in a foster home is not the
best situation with these children. So this is something that
is very important.
And now I have mentioned some statistics in Tennessee, but
many other states also face problems of similar size.
In addition, meth continues to spread into states where it
was once thought not to be a problem.
H.R. 798 is the result of a roundtable held in my District
almost a year ago. Working with local officials and
representatives of Tennessee Technological University, we
identified a set of problems that needed to be addressed aside
from more funding for law enforcement and education
initiatives. These problems included the need for health-based
guidelines for clean up of meth labs, improved field equipment
to detect meth labs, studies on the long-term health impacts on
children found in meth labs, and first responders who may be
exposed in the line of duty.
These issues all have a strong research component and could
be addressed by the agencies within the Science Committee's
jurisdiction.
And once again, to put a quick face on this, suppose your
parents bought a duplex, with the income being a part of their
retirement. Well, somebody moves into one side of this duplex,
sets up a meth lab. It winds up being busted, and for all
practical purposes, they have got a contaminated duplex they
can't rent, sell, or do anything else with because there are
really no standards right now as to what is clean up. And part
of what we are going to try to do is set those standards so
that we will know what is going to be cleaned up, not only for
public safety, but also that property then can be put back to
good use.
And for law enforcement agents, right now, if they have to
swipe a doorknob or a car or something for evidence, they have
to then send that in and some days later they get it back. We
hope we are going to be able to establish some equipment that
is going to allow them to do that right there on the spot,
which will then give them the due process to go in and make a
bust right on the spot there.
So really this bill is aimed at protecting innocent people
whose lives are endangered by these illegal activities, and I
think this will help us move that process forward.
And again, I thank the Chairman for his help in putting the
bill together and for having this hearing today and moving this
forward.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gordon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bart Gordon
I want to join Chairman Boehlert in welcoming everyone to this
morning's hearing.
First, I would like to thank Rep. Calvert and Chairman Boehlert for
working with me on H.R. 798, the Methamphetamine Remediation Research
Act of 2005. Rep. Calvert and Chairman Boehlert both recognize the
challenges facing our local communities caused by meth abuse and
production. I am pleased that we are moving this bill so early in the
109th Congress.
Meth abuse and production is an insidious problem that is spreading
rapidly across our country. The meth epidemic destroys families and
communities, leaving in its wake overtaxed law enforcement authorities,
overburdened child service agencies and toxic dumps wherever meth is
produced.
Last year more than 17,000 meth labs were seized nationwide. In my
State of Tennessee, law enforcement authorities seized nearly 1,200
labs and more than 700 children were placed in State custody as a
result of meth lab seizures and incidents. While these numbers are
staggering, they represent only instances where labs were discovered.
Some law enforcement officials estimate that only 30 percent of meth
labs are ever found.
While I've mentioned some statistics from Tennessee, other states
face problems of similar size. In addition, meth continues to spread
into states where it was once thought not to be a problem. With
distributed small-scale production and because meth abuse primarily
occurs in rural areas, citizens often don't realize there is a problem
until it has already sunk its roots deep into their community.
H.R. 798 is the result of a roundtable I held in my district almost
a year ago. Working with local officials and representatives of the
Tennessee Technological University, we identified a set of problems
that needed to be addressed aside from more funding for law enforcement
and education initiatives.
These problems included the need for health-based guidelines for
the cleanup of meth labs, improved field equipment to detect meth labs,
and studies on the long-term health impacts on children found in meth
labs and first responders who may be exposed in the line of duty.
These issues all have a strong research component and could be
addressed by agencies within the Science Committee's jurisdiction. H.R.
798 is the product from working with outside groups and Rep. Calvert
and Chairman Boehlert. In addition, the National Alliance for Model
State Drug Laws has been a valuable resource as we were developing this
bill.
H.R. 798 is not a total solution to the methamphetamine epidemic.
Unfortunately, there will always be people who decide to harm
themselves by using and manufacturing dangerous drugs such as
methamphetamine. H.R. 798 is aimed at protecting innocent people whose
lives are endangered by these illegal activities.
I want to thank our witnesses for taking time from their busy
schedules to appear before the Committee today.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Gordon.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Costello follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello
Good afternoon. I want to thank Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member
Gordon and Representative Calvert for introducing the Methamphetamine
Remediation Research Act of 2005 and for holding a hearing on this
legislation. As a cosponsor of H.R. 798, I strongly support the
establishment of a federal research program that would develop
voluntary standards to help states deal with the harmful consequences
of methamphetamine laboratories. I appreciate the witnesses who came to
testify before our committee today so Members can gain a better
understanding of the methamphetamine problem in the United States and
learn how agencies, federal, State or local, currently respond to
residential laboratories, in order to address unmet research needs.
As the use of methamphetamines has spread so has awareness of the
challenges associated with this addictive drug. No other narcotic has
the wide-array of dangers--crime, social consequences, environmental
degradation, property damage--that comes with methamphetamine use. I
realize that I am not alone when I say that my congressional district
and surrounding communities have seen a growing methamphetamine
problem. It appears as though daily articles are published in
newspapers across the country explaining how methamphetamine use is
increasing, and revealing the damaging affects it has on communities.
After speaking with the law enforcement officials in the 12th
district of Illinois, I secured funding in 2003 and 2004 for a grant
programs in Southern Illinois to train approximately 100 law
enforcement officers across the region in dismantling and cleaning up
meth labs. Also, the grant supplies the hazardous material suits and
equipment that officers need to safely conduct their investigation. As
the panel knows, cleanup is expensive, and the cost to remediate a
1,500 square foot lab can range from $5,000-$15,000. Unfortunately,
most states have little or no funding to conduct research on meth
cleanup, and as a result, not much is known about the consequences of
long-term exposure to the traces of chemicals that individuals,
including children, may be exposed to living in a former meth lab.
Undeniably, methamphetamine production and abuse is becoming an
emerging problem across the country. The Federal Government has yet to
develop a strategy for how to respond to methamphetamine use.
Furthermore, states are struggling to protect the public because there
are no national guidelines or regulations on how to clean up a
residential meth lab or reoccupation. Consequently, I am very pleased
this committee is taking the first step in holding a hearing on H.R.
798, and look forward to hearing the testimony of today's witness
panel.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to commend you, Chairman
Boehlert, for calling this very important hearing on this very
important issue. I also wish to thank Ranking Member Gordon for
authoring this needed legislation.
Instances of methamphetamine trafficking and abuse in the United
States are on the increase. As a result, this drug is having a
devastating impact on communities across the Nation.
Unfortunately, many common household products contain most of the
necessary chemicals to complete the manufacturing process.
Another disastrous side effect of the methamphetamine epidemic is
the bad affect it is having on the environment. Toxic waste from
clandestine drug labs in rural America is being dumped on the land,
into streams, sewage systems and landfills. For every pound of meth
produced, between one and six pounds of highly toxic waste is
generated. These chemicals and fumes can permeate the walls, carpets,
plaster and wood of meth labs, as well as the surrounding soil, are
known to cause cancer, short-term and permanent brain damage and immune
and respiratory system problems. Of the 1654 labs seized nationwide in
1998, nearly one in five were found because of fire or explosion.
That is why it is so urgent that Congress takes immediate steps to
combat meth production and its dangerous consequences.
I thank the witnesses who have agreed to appear here today to
answer questions. We appreciate your insight on this issue.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Davis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Lincoln Davis
Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
Just this week, CBS 60 Minutes ran a story about a health crisis
that has become a major problem in many rural areas of our country. I
would like to thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, Members of this
committee, and other colleagues for bringing this crisis to the
forefront of the national health care debate.
The crisis is methamphetamine. My State of Tennessee ranks third in
the Nation in the total number of meth clandestine incidents reported
in 2004, according to the National Clandestine Laboratory Database. In
fact, 75 percent of all the meth lab seizures in the Southeast are in
Tennessee.
More than 1200 meth labs were seized in Tennessee in 2004. In my
District alone, there are eight counties in which 20 or more meth labs
each were found. One could argue that my District is the epicenter of
Tennessee's meth crisis.
Methamphetamine destroys families and communities. It's cheap, easy
to make, and highly addictive. It is deadly--and has been known to kill
people who don't even use it.
So when we talk about meth, we are not just talking about one drug
and how it affects the user, we are also talking about the health and
well being of those living in the same environment on a daily basis.
And more often then not they are children.
Meth is often produced in apartment buildings or other shared
housing units. The chemicals used to make it are extremely toxic and
flammable.
Nearly one in five labs is found because of fire or explosion.
Then, when first responders arrive at the scene or workers come to
reclaim the property, they are poisoned by the toxic chemicals in the
air, on countertops, in the furniture, and everywhere else in the
house.
No one has studied the health effects of meth cleanup, and there
are no guidelines on how to even begin cleaning up a meth lab.
I believe that Mr. Gordon's bill, H.R. 798, provides a solid
foundation to help address this issue.
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, Members of the Committee, I urge
you to support this legislation.
Because somewhere, as we speak, methamphetamine is cooking. A match
will be lit. An explosion will occur. A life will be lost.
Time is of the utmost importance, and we need to act now.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement by Mr. Carnahan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Russ Carnahan
Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, I want to thank you for
introducing this legislation and hosting this all-important hearing.
I am tremendously sensitive to the problem of methamphetamine or
``meth'' abuse due to it's widespread emergence in my district. Last
year my home State of Missouri had the unfortunate distinction of being
the number one state in the country, by more than double, for
methamphetamine laboratory seizures. Furthermore, Jefferson County,
which resides in my congressional district, has the most seizures and
arrests related to ``meth'' in the State of Missouri. While I am proud
of the job that our local law enforcement officials are doing, I am
troubled by the growing prevalence of ``meth'' abuse in rural areas of
our country and believe that the U.S. Congress has a responsibility to
address the problem.
I am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 798, the bill under
consideration, as it will aid our local law enforcement, environmental
regulatory, and health care officials in coping with ``meth'' abuse by
providing voluntary guidelines to clean up and remediate the highly
toxic chemicals that are used to make the drug. As it stands now, the
harmful effects of contamination are not fully recognized and first
responders, future inhabitants, and sadly, children are at risk of
developing health problems. I truly hope that we can provide local
officials in Jefferson County, Missouri and others across the country
the tools to help them navigate the remediation of former
methamphetamine laboratories.
I applaud our bipartisan leadership for addressing this growing
problem and look forward to hearing the testimony of the panelists.
[The prepared statement by Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Sheila Jackson Lee
I would like to thank the Science Committee for organizing this
hearing regarding the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005,
H.R. 798. I am a proud co-sponsor of this legislation and believe H.R.
798 will help correct many of the problems related to methamphetamines.
The Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act will implement a research
program at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop health-
related guidelines for the cleanup of methamphetamines. This bill will
also call for the National Academy of Science to perform a study on the
long-term health effects on children rescued from living in
methamphetamine lab homes. In addition, the National Institute of
Standards and Technology will create a research program to develop
methamphetamine detection equipment emphasizing field testing kits.
The problems produced by methamphetamines and incidents related to
methamphetamines are growing daily. As of February 24, 2005, the State
of Texas recorded 422 incidences related to methamphetamine labs and as
a nation we had a total of 16,326 incidences. The amount of
methamphetamines being used by our young adults is alarming. In 1999,
5.2 percent of 18-25 year olds reported a lifetime use of
methamphetamines. As more of our population uses methamphetamines, the
demand for the drug rises. Nowhere is it a bigger problem that in the
Midwest, where methamphetamines account for nearly 90 percent of all
drug cases. In states such as Oklahoma, methamphetamines are surpassing
cocaine as the drug of choice. The State Medical Examiner's office
reports the number of death cases testing positive for methamphetamines
have been higher than cocaine for the past three years. The office also
reports methamphetamine is found in more cases of homicides, and motor
vehicle accidents.
Methamphetamine labs not only damage individuals, they affect our
children and our environment. As the founder and co-chair of the
Congressional Children's Caucus, I am saddened by the effects
methamphetamine labs have on children. Children living at
methamphetamine labs are at increased risk for severe neglect and
physical and sexual abuse. Children raised in the methamphetamine lab
environment experience stress and trauma that significantly affect
their overall safety and health, including their behavior, emotional,
and cognitive functioning. Hazardous living conditions and filth are
common in methamphetamine lab homes where explosives and loaded guns
are often present and in many incidences, in easy-to-reach locations.
The safety and development of our children are negatively influenced by
living in methamphetamine lab homes.
Our environment suffers from methamphetamine labs as well. In
general, there are 5-7 pounds of toxic waste produced for every pound
of methamphetamine manufactured. There are more than 30 chemicals used
to produce methamphetamines, and most are explosive, caustic and
carcinogenic. The chemicals are often poured into streams, down drains
or disposed of in fields, yards or gutters. Many highway clean up crews
have reported finding toxic garbage from methamphetamines in ditches.
All of this illicit toxic waste eventually winds up in waterways via
rainwater runoff.
Chairman Boehlert. Our distinguished panel of witnesses
today consist of: Mr. Scott Burns, who is Deputy Director for
State and Local Affairs, Office of National Drug Control
Policy. He is from the White House; Ms. Sherry L. Green,
Executive Director, National Alliance for Model State Drug
Laws; Dr. John Martyny, Senior Industrial Hygienist, Division
of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National
Jewish Medical and Research Center; Mr. Henry Hamilton,
Assistant Commissioner, Public Protection, New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation; Sheriff Gary Howard
of Tioga County, New York. And let me tell you, I take personal
pride in Sheriff Howard, because I am privileged to share a
Congressional District that he is a leader in. And he has been
a leader in educating this Member of Congress about this very
serious problem. And people so often are a little bit cynical
about Congress. They think we come down here, live in
isolation, and don't pay any attention to anybody else and talk
to each other and decide everything amongst ourselves. Not so.
You just heard Mr. Gordon explain how he got his education back
home in Tennessee from the people at Tennessee Technological
University. I got my education back in Tioga County, New York,
and Sheriff, I am so very pleased to have you. For those of you
in this room who don't know it, he has had the most busts in
New York, a small, rural county in upstate New York, of any
Sheriff in any jurisdiction within that state. And he is a very
able professional, and he exemplifies the best in law
enforcement. Sheriff, I thank you for what you have done for me
personally in my education process and also for what you do
every single day for the people of your jurisdiction. They are
fortunate to have you.
And for the purpose of introduction, the Chair recognizes
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to introduce Dr. Robert Bell, President of
Tennessee Technological University. Dr. Bell joined the
Tennessee Tech faculty in 1976 as Chairman of Management and
Marketing. After serving various positions at Tennessee Tech,
he was named President in 2001. The Science Committee Members
will be interested to know that Dr. Bell served four years on
the Board of Examiners for the Malcolm Baldridge National
Quality Award, and in 1998, was recognized by the Secretary of
Commerce for outstanding service to the Nation as a quality
examiner.
Dr. Bell is here today because of Tennessee Tech's work in
fighting the methamphetamine problem in the Tennessee upper
Cumberland region, an area that Lincoln Davis knows very well
and represents a portion of that, and Lincoln is a graduate
of--a prior graduate of Tennessee Tech.
So, Dr. Bell, thank you for your work with Governor
Bredesen on the task force in Tennessee, and thank you for
helping us on a national level.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you so much, Mr. Gordon.
Now here is the drill. We have got the little clock in the
middle and we have got red light, green light, and caution. And
Sheriff, you will know, we haven't changed the rules down here.
Red light means stop, green light means go, and caution means
slow up. But you will see the red light come on after five
minutes. We are not going to be arbitrary, because you are
expert witnesses. We are here to learn from you, so don't get
nervous, but when you see the red light go on, begin to
summarize, if you haven't already done so, and that will allow
a lot more opportunity for the panel up here, our colleagues,
to have questions, and questions lead to answers, and answers
lead to education.
So with that, Mr. Burns, you are first up.
STATEMENT OF MR. SCOTT M. BURNS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR STATE AND
LOCAL AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
Mr. Burns. Thank you, Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member
Gordon, Congressman Calvert, and distinguished Members of the
Committee. I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today to discuss efforts to reduce the problem of
methamphetamine in America.
And if I may, I would also like to acknowledge my
Congressman from Utah, Jim Matheson, it is good to see you.
The Office of National Drug Control Policy just released,
this past month, the President's National Drug Control
Strategy, which builds upon the dramatic successes of the past
three years in partnership with you in Congress, a 17 percent
reduction of drug use among 8th, 10th, and 12th graders over
the past three years. That equates to about 600,000 fewer young
people using drugs in America. We have also seen a 25 percent
decrease in teenage methamphetamine use.
Focusing on prevention and treatment as well as law
enforcement and international programs, the 2005 strategy
focuses on three core priorities: stopping drug use before it
starts, healing America's drug users, and disrupting the
market. My written testimony discusses a number of programs,
regulations, legislation, and efforts on the national level to
discourage methamphetamine from our communities, and I request
that it be made part of the record.
I first want to briefly discuss the problem and expand upon
what you have said.
The brunt of the fight against methamphetamine is felt by
the courageous members of law enforcement, the men and women
across this country, some 700,000 law enforcement officers,
courageous people like Sheriff Howard. The issue is one with
which I am well acquainted, and prior to being nominated and
confirmed in my present position at the White House, I was a
prosecutor in a small town, a rural county, for 16 years, and
the major problem that I dealt with was methamphetamine. I have
worked closely with law enforcement, and I know too well the
toll that methamphetamine production and use take on
individuals and communities.
Fortunately, there is good news. We have recently seen
encouraging results from new methods of attacking the
methamphetamine trade. And the Administration's National
Synthetic Drugs Action Plan is a comprehensive approach.
Let me take a moment and describe the market.
As many of you know, there are two main sources for
methamphetamine consumed in the United States. Our information
suggests that most of the methamphetamine consumed in the
United States is likely to come from super labs, labs that can
produce an excess of 10 pounds in a 24-hour period. They are
located primarily outside of our borders, although there are
some operating within. We believe that a smaller amount is
produced in small, toxic laboratories, or STLs, which can be
found in residences, vehicles, and makeshift structures, as you
know. Attacking the supply from both sources is important, but
each requires a somewhat different approach.
International efforts.
Law enforcement efforts have aimed to cut the supply of
pseudoephedrine from Canadian producers to domestic super labs.
The Administration's law enforcement efforts in this area have
been coordinated in Operation Northern Star, a law enforcement
initiative led by DEA with participation by the Bureau of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, and also the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police, RCMP. Since the initiative's inception
in 2001, the number of pseudoephedrine seizures along the
Canadian border has reduced by 92 percent. That is significant.
On the southwest border, the Administration will continue to
work with our international partners to stop the flow of both
pseudoephedrine and ephedrine into Mexico through multi-lateral
cooperation in the international chemical industry as well as
continue to work with our partners in Mexico to identify and
dismantle super labs on that side of the border.
Domestic efforts.
On our side of the border, the Organized Crime Drug
Enforcement Task Force, or OCDETF, as well as the High-
Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, HIDTA, provide a valuable
means for federal, State, and local law enforcement to
collaborate against mid-level and high-level methamphetamine
traffickers in regions where methamphetamine is a significant
threat. OCDETF investigations that involve methamphetamine are
particularly prevalent in three regions: the west central, the
southwest, and the pacific.
State regulation.
The states have responded to the STLs, or the small, toxic
laboratories, not only through law enforcement, but also by
legislative or regulatory means that respond to the
methamphetamine threat that is unique to their individual
states. It is different in New York than in Tennessee. It is
different in Utah than it is in Central Valley, California. The
measures are varied in nature and incorporate a host of
responses: improved treatment, prevention, and education
measures, local precursor controls, and aggressive law
enforcement efforts. Over the next several months, the
Administration will closely analyze the data and results in
states where the innovative measures have been implemented.
And let me close by speaking briefly about the National
Synthetic Drugs Action Plan.
The Administration supports lowering the federal limit on
single sales of pseudoephedrine products and eliminating the
blister pack loophole. That is important. The action plan
contains other detailed recommendations, including several
pertaining to tighter regulatory controls of ephedrine and
pseudoephedrine, treatment protocols and practice, education
and training, and investigatory and prosecutorial approaches to
methamphetamine cases. Critical to the successful
implementation of the action plan's recommendation will be a
continuing commitment to cooperate not only between federal
agencies, but also between the Executive and Legislative
Branches of the Federal Government and a continuing partnership
with state and local entities committed to making the
methamphetamine problem smaller. I co-chair the National
Synthetic Action Plan Committee. We will deliver a report to
the Attorney General in April, and I look forward to working
with each of you when that is completed.
Thank you again.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Burns follows:]
Prepared Statement of Scott M. Burns
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member Gordon, and Members of the
Committee: thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to
discuss efforts to reduce the problem of methamphetamine in America.
The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a component of
the Executive Office of the President, was established by the Anti-Drug
Abuse Act of 1988.
ONDCP is the President's primary source of support for counter-drug
policy development and program oversight. The Office advises the
President on national and international drug control policies and
strategies, and works to ensure the effective coordination of drug
programs within the National Drug Control Program agencies. The
principal purpose of ONDCP is to establish policies, priorities, and
objectives for the Nation's drug control program. The goals of the
program are to reduce illicit drug use, manufacturing, and trafficking,
drug-related crime and violence, and drug-related health consequences.
To achieve these goals, the Director of ONDCP is charged with producing
the National Drug Control Strategy. The Strategy directs the Nation's
anti-drug efforts and establishes a program, a budget, and guidelines
for cooperation among federal, State, and local entities.
In my testimony I will discuss the extent of the methamphetamine
problem in America, the Federal Government's progress in reducing the
number of methamphetamine labs and ameliorating their impact, and the
principal findings and recommendations of the Administration's
``National Synthetic Drugs Action Plan'' regarding methamphetamine
laboratories.
The issue of methamphetamine is one with which I am well
acquainted. Prior to being nominated and confirmed in my present
position, I worked as an elected prosecutor in a rural county, where
methamphetamine use, sales, and production were a problem. Prosecutors
and police in areas where methamphetamine is a problem know too well
the toll that methamphetamine production and use take on both
individuals and their community. In short, the consequences to
individual health and the associated criminal activity as well as the
environmental and economic harm, can be devastating.
Fortunately, there is good news. We have recently seen some
encouraging results from new methods of attacking the methamphetamine
trade. And the Administration's above-referenced ``National Synthetic
Drugs Action Plan,'' which I will discuss here in more detail, is a
comprehensive approach designed to weaken the supply of, and the demand
for, methamphetamine in the United States. I will highlight relevant
parts of the Action Plan and outline the tasks that we intend to
accomplish over the next four years to continue to reduce the
methamphetamine problem in America, focusing on methamphetamine labs
for this hearing.
Describing the Market
Any supply reduction strategy for methamphetamine must first
inquire as to the source of the drug. Available information regarding
the amount of methamphetamine seized from methamphetamine laboratories
of varying sizes suggests that most of the methamphetamine consumed in
the United States is likely to originate from ``superlabs''
(laboratories with a daily production capacity exceeding 10 pounds),
and either smuggled into the United States from outside of our borders,
or produced within our borders, often by Mexican criminal
organizations.
Similarly, we believe that a smaller amount is produced in smaller
quantities at ``small toxic laboratories'' (STLs), which can be found
in residences, vehicles, and makeshift structures. The impact of STLs
has been of particular note on a number of levels. First, children in
and around STLs are harmed by the toxic chemicals used in the
methamphetamine manufacturing process. Small toxic labs contaminate the
environment when methamphetamine cooks dump their toxic chemicals into
the water table and onto farmland. Also, these labs create life-
threatening hazards, such as explosion or chemical toxicity, which
harms not only the people cooking methamphetamine, but first
responders, who try to save lives by entering burning and contaminated
sites. As noted above, the amount of methamphetamine consumed in the
United States originating from these smaller clandestine laboratories
is believed to be smaller than that originating from superlabs.
However, due to the effects described above, they are a particularly
pernicious problem.
Attacking the supply from both sources--superlabs and STLs--is
important, but each requires a somewhat different approach.
Administration Efforts
With respect to the superlabs described above, law enforcement
efforts have aimed to cut off the supply of pseudoephedrine, the
principal ingredient (or precursor), used to produce methamphetamine.
In recent years, the supply came primarily via Canadian suppliers to
domestic superlab operators. Law enforcement efforts to disrupt the
diversion of these chemicals from Canada have been coordinated in
Operation Northern Star, led on the American side by DEA, with
participation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and closely
coordinated with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). Canada's
implementation of controls on the importation of precursor chemicals
was also a critical element in stopping the flow of chemicals into
Canada. In a sign that these efforts are having a real impact, the
number of superlab seizures within the United States has substantially
declined since the initiative's inception in 2001. Other indicators
suggesting that Operation Northern Star has contributed to shrinking
the illicit pseudoephedrine market include a decline in pseudoephedrine
and ephedrine incidents at the Canadian border by 92 percent and a
doubling in the price of bulk pseudoephedrine in the illicit market in
California, the state with the most superlabs. Arrests and prosecutions
are among the principal drivers of these market changes: in April 2003,
the DEA and RCMP announced the arrest of 78 individuals in 10 cities
throughout the U.S. and Canada, and just last month, the DEA arrested
an additional 90 methamphetamine and ephedrine traffickers in a single
operation.
Along with the reduction in domestic superlabs, it appears that the
decline in chemical trafficking to Canada has caused some chemical
suppliers to seek to ship the chemicals to Mexico instead, where law
enforcement believes the number of labs is increasing. Consistent with
these changes to the illicit pseudoephedrine market, methamphetamine
seizures at the shared border with Mexico rose from 1,130 kilograms in
2002 and 1,790 kilograms in 2003 to 2,145 kilograms in 2004.
For this reason, the Administration will continue to work with our
international partners to stop the flow of bulk pseudoephedrine and
ephedrine into Mexico, through bilateral chemical control cooperation
and multilateral cooperation with the international chemical industry.
We particularly acknowledge the leadership of the Fox administration in
seeking mechanisms to control the methamphetamine threat in Mexico. We
fully support their efforts to become more effective at identifying and
dismantling labs on their side of the border. During the week of
November 8, 2004, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, in
coordination with DEA, dismantled a major Mexican smuggling
organization that was smuggling precursor chemicals and finished
methamphetamine into the United States from Mexico. During the course
of this Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF)
investigation, agents seized 1,100 pounds of iodine, 37 gallons of
hypophosphorous acid and 25 gallons of hydriodic acid--all of which are
precursors used in the methamphetamine production process--at or
shortly after crossing the border. The DEA Southwest Laboratory has
calculated that this quantity of chemicals could have been used toward
the production of approximately 550 pounds of methamphetamine.
Currently, the United States is involved in several multilateral
initiatives to track chemicals used in the manufacture of amphetamines,
methamphetamine, and other amphetamine-type stimulants such as 3,4
methlyenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and other synthetics, with the
goal of enhancing the involvement of China, India, the Netherlands,
Canada, Mexico, Poland, the Czech Republic, and other countries in
cooperative chemical control efforts.
In addition, the efforts of federal law enforcement agencies and
programs continue to be focused on disrupting the domestic market for
methamphetamine. The percentage of Organized Crime Drug Enforcement
Task Force (OCDETF) investigations in which at least one of the drugs
involved included methamphetamine increased from 19.2 percent in FY
2001 to 25.1 percent in FY 2002. The program's methamphetamine focus
has continued to increase since then, to 25.9 percent in FY 2003 and
26.7 percent in FY 2004. OCDETF investigations which involve
methamphetamine are particularly prevalent in three of the nine OCDETF
regions--West-Central, where 53.1 percent of the investigations involve
methamphetamine; Southwest, with 58.8 percent; and Pacific, with 45.8
percent.
National Synthetic Drugs Action Plan
In October 2004, the Administration released the first-ever
``National Synthetic Drugs Action Plan,'' which describes the Federal
Government's response to the production, trafficking and abuse of
synthetic drugs like methamphetamine and MDMA, as well as the diversion
of pharmaceutical products. Among the many recommendations of the
Action Plan are those designed to cut off access to methamphetamine
producers to precursors such as pseudoephedrine.
Federal legislation will be necessary to implement many of the
recommendations set forth in the Action Plan. The new Synthetic Drugs
Interagency Working Group, established by the Action Plan, will be
developing recommendations to implement key provisions of the plan.
Several provisions of the Action Plan aim to disrupt the ability of
methamphetamine cooks to gather the chemicals they need to produce the
drug. Toward this end, the Administration supports lowering the federal
limit on single-sales of pseudoephedrine products. The Action Plan's
recommendations also include the deletion of the so-called ``blister-
pack exemption'' that currently exists in federal law. Though the
exemption was initially implemented based on the expectation that
methamphetamine manufacturers would not be likely to undergo the
relatively difficult process of removing small amounts of
pseudoephedrine from a large number of blister packs, law enforcement
reports that even blister packs are being procured in large quantities
and the emptied packs found at methamphetamine labs. For this reason,
expecting blister-pack sales to abide by the same rules as other pill
containers will help in the fight against methamphetamine production.
Similarly, ensuring that these standards apply to the various forms of
the product will prevent methamphetamine cooks from switching to
alternate pseudoephedrine products, as the pills or tablets become more
difficult to procure in significant quantities.
As with any regulatory scheme, it is critical that appropriate
penalties be imposed for violation. Tough sanctions should be imposed
upon not only methamphetamine producers and traffickers--both at the
State and federal level--but also upon those who illicitly traffic or
distribute methamphetamine precursors such as pseudoephedrine.
Especially because domestic superlabs have declined, and some of these
superlabs appear to have been pushed to areas outside of our borders, a
continuing focus by law enforcement on illicit shipments of bulk
pseudoephedrine inside and outside our borders is critically important.
In response to the presence of these widespread smaller
laboratories, the Action Plan highlights the importance of improved
treatment, prevention, and education measures and makes several
recommendations for federal action in these areas.
Additional measures taken by some states have focused on limiting
not only the amount of pseudoephedrine products that may be purchased,
but also the location and manner in which the product may be purchased,
and have imposed additional requirements for the process of the
purchase itself. Over the next several months, the Administration will
be closely analyzing the data and results in states where these
innovative measures have been implemented. As many of these State
actions were taken in the recent past, the Administration will wait for
better data and information to emerge before commenting on the
effectiveness or impact of the various proposals to reduce
methamphetamine availability or methamphetamine laboratory numbers and
how they relate to federal policy.
Critical to the successful implementation of the Action Plan's
recommendations will be a continuing commitment to cooperation not only
between federal agencies, but also between the Executive and
Legislative branches of the Federal Government, and a continuing
partnership with State and local entities committed to making the
methamphetamine problem smaller. We expect that the work of the Action
Plan's Interagency Working Group will culminate this year in a final
report to cabinet-level officials including the ONDCP Director and
Attorney General, and possibly additional legislative recommendations
to Congress.
Conclusion
It is important to remember that this drug threat, like others we
have faced in the past, is not impervious to effective supply--and
demand-control, as seen in Operation Northern Star. We know from years
of experience that when we control the precursor chemicals and reduce
the availability of methamphetamine, the price of the drug will rise.
By prosecuting those who steal large quantities of pseudoephedrine from
small mom-and-pop stores and those who would expose children to the
toxic chemicals used to make this drug, we disrupt production. As we
make treatment available, and support more people making it into
recovery, demand will diminish. This requires all levels of government,
as well as the private sector and our international allies, to commit
to diminishing this threat to Americans' health and well-being.
The Administration looks forward to working with this committee and
the entire Congress on the important issue of methamphetamine. Together
with Congress, we can achieve the kind of progress that will improve
the lives of our children and make us all proud.
Biography for Scott M. Burns
Pursuant to his nomination by President George W. Bush, Scott Burns
was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate as Deputy
Director for State and Local Affairs in the White House Drug Policy
Office in April, 2002.
In addition to his role as principal advisor to ONDCP Director John
P. Walters regarding federal, State and local law enforcement, Mr.
Burns is also responsible for oversight of the $226 million High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program. Soon after his
appointment, Mr. Burns reorganized the Office of State and Local
Affairs, and assumed new leadership responsibilities for administration
initiatives such as reducing prescription drug abuse, enhancing drug
courts, tackling marijuana and methamphetamine production on public
lands, and crafting other national strategies to disrupt the market for
drugs such as methamphetamine, marijuana, cocaine and heroin. Most
recently, Mr. Burns was appointed by the White House to serve as the
United States' representative to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA),
an international organization charged with eliminating doping and drug
use in sport. Mr. Burns represents the 40-nation Americas region on
WADA's governing Foundation Board, and also chairs WADA's Ethics and
Education Committee, which aims to educate young athletes worldwide on
the health and ethical dangers of drug use.
Prior to his confirmation, Mr. Burns served as the County Attorney
in Iron County, Utah, where he successfully prosecuted over 100 felony
jury trials, including rape, child abuse, narcotics, and capital
murder. He also routinely provided pro bono legal service to the
indigent. During his sixteen years as County Attorney, Mr. Burns served
on several state and national boards, including the White House
Committee on Illegal Narcotics and Addiction. In Utah, he instructed
peace officers and others on constitutional law, search and seizure,
race relations, and the civil liability of peace officers. As an
adjunct professor at Southern Utah University, Mr. Burns taught
numerous criminal justice courses.
Mr. Burns is a graduate of Southern Utah University and was
inducted into that university's Sports Hall of Fame in 1996. He
received his J.D. from California Western School of Law.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Burns, and we
look forward to continuing our working relationship with you.
Ms. Green.
STATEMENT OF MS. SHERRY L. GREEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
ALLIANCE FOR MODEL STATE DRUG LAWS
Ms. Green. Thank you, Chairman Boehlert, Congressman
Gordon, Members of the Committee, and staff. I want to thank
you for this opportunity for my organization to actually
testify today on this very important issue.
I would like to just briefly highlight a couple of points
that are in my written testimony.
The National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws is a
bipartisan non-profit organization, which Congress has actually
funded since 1995, specifically to help states create a more
comprehensive effective system of drug and alcohol laws. We
actually grew out of the 1993 President's Commission of Model
State Drug Laws that Congress created specifically to draft a
model code of drug and alcohol laws. And over the last 10
years, we have used our model code of border-free drug laws and
policies to actually help states on a number of particular drug
problems, including methamphetamine laboratories. Now when I
started working with states on this issue a decade ago, I was
working with solely western states and primarily at that time
on the issue of controlling access to the chemicals that are
used to manufacture methamphetamine.
But over the last decade, as the problem of methamphetamine
laboratories has actually raced across the country toward the
east, many State and local officials have actually asked us if
we would draft a model act or model guidelines specifically on
clean up and remediation procedures. Now in preparation for
that drafting process, we have actually pulled together a
working group of approximately 20 State and local officials
from around the country, and they are all in different stages
of developing and/or implementing clean up and remediation
procedures.
We also did quite a thorough search of existing state laws,
regulations, and guidelines on this particular issue. And there
is no question, when you look at the laws, the guidelines and
even the policies, that there is a wide spectrum of clean up
and remediation procedures the states have adopted.
Now on one end of the spectrum, you have states that have
taken a more minimal approach. They will recommend that the
property be aired out for several days and that the owner use
the proper and appropriate household cleaning products to clean
the contaminants.
On the other end of the spectrum, you have states that have
extraordinarily detailed procedures on preliminary site
assessment to detect particular levels of contamination, on the
decontamination procedures themselves, and also on any follow-
up testing that is needed to determine whether or not the
appropriate levels of clean up have, in fact, occurred.
Regardless of where on that spectrum of clean up and
remediation procedures that a particular state might fall, the
core issue we have discovered really remains the same: how
clean is clean for reoccupation purposes?
Now there are seven states at this particular point in time
that have attempted to address that issue through their
statutes, their regulations, and their guidelines. And those
particular states are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado,
Minnesota, Tennessee, and Washington. And Utah also has a
proposed rule out at this point in time that would also address
the issue. Now these particular states have actually specified
a decontamination standard. Now the decontamination standard
that is commonly used, there are really two types of
measurements. It is either 0.1 or 0.5 micrograms per hundred
centimeters squared. Now this particular type of standard is
actually a feasibility-based decontamination standard that is
based on a cost comparison. Basically, what it does is it tends
to look at how much a state would want to spend to achieve a
certain decontamination level with officials having a perceived
idea of the kind of protection that level might afford for
adverse health consequences.
Most state officials, however, regardless of what state we
are talking about, whether they have worked on the issue for
years or are just beginning to work on the issues, would
optimally prefer to use a risk-based or a health-based
standard, a standard which would help them determine the level
to which they need to clean to prevent the average person from
suffering adverse health consequences. The problem is we really
don't know for sure what that level is. There is just too
little research on the short-term and long-term consequences to
adults and to children who are also exposed to methamphetamine
as well as other chemicals of concern that are found in
methamphetamine laboratories.
So in this vacuum of incomplete research, states are
turning to Dr. Martyny's research, which, as we have discovered
in our own review of laws, policies, and programs, is the
leading research at this time on this issue. They also do turn
to some of the other studies, few that they are, that are out
there, and they look to the practices and the lessons that have
been learned from states like Washington and Oregon, which have
dealt with clean up and remediation issues for many, many
years.
Now in order to help provide additional guidance to states,
we are actually pulling our working group of State and local
officials together on April 27 in Salt Lake City. What we are
going to do is ask them to help us identify the particular
procedures or elements that should be part of a model act or a
model guideline at this point in time, given the little
research information that we do have. And what we are going to
do is take that input, and we are going to translate it into
legislative or regulatory language, which will be flexible
enough so that we can disseminate it to decision-makers around
the country and that, as the need arises, we can easily have it
be amended to incorporate advances in research and technology
so that we can always have state-of-the-art information.
I want to thank you again for allowing us the opportunity
to share information with you and, of course, at the
appropriate time, I will be more than happy to answer any
questions you might have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Green follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sherry L. Green
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member Gordon, Members of the Committee,
and staff, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today to
offer an overview of the work of the National Alliance for Model State
Drug Laws as it relates to states efforts to address the cleanup and
remediation of former methamphetamine laboratories. I am honored to be
here to discuss these issues that are among the most pressing for
states as they address the many problems related to methamphetamine.
About the National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws
As you may know, the National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws
(NAMSDL) is the successor of the President's Commission on Model State
Drug Laws, appointed by President George H.W. Bush. At the conclusion
of the Commission's work of crafting the 44 model state drug laws
addressing over 70 alcohol and other drug issues, the Commissioners
created a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization to serve as an ongoing,
bipartisan, independently operated resource to assist states in
assessing needs, strategizing, and implementing laws and policies to
address alcohol and other drug problems using the model laws as a menu
of options. Congress began funding the National Alliance for Model
State Drug Laws in fiscal year 1995 to hold state model drug laws
summits to serve as needs assessment and action planning mechanisms and
to provide technical assistance to states as they implement summit
recommendations including elements of the models and address emerging
issues related to alcohol and other drugs.
Working with States to Address Cleanup and Remediation of Former
Methamphetamine Laboratory Sites
Over a decade ago, the aforementioned President's Commission worked
with states to address problems related to methamphetamine
laboratories. Since its inception, NAMSDL has built upon the work of
the Commission through its Summit process, follow-up work, and
technical assistance in their efforts to deal with methamphetamine.
However over the past two years as the use and production of this drug
has increased and spread to states throughout the country, calls for
NAMSDL's assistance on legislative and policy efforts to address meth
and its related problems increased precipitously.
In response to this high volume of technical assistance requests,
NAMSDL held the National Methamphetamine Legislative and Policy
Conference in St. Paul, Minnesota in October 2004. This event focused
on legislative and policy options toward creating effective,
comprehensive, and coordinated responses to precursor chemical control,
drug endangered children (DEC), cleanup and remediation of meth lab
sites, addiction treatment, and related issues. Three hundred sixty-
five people from 34 states, the District of Columbia, and two tribal
nations participated in this event; these individuals included law
enforcement officials, addiction treatment professionals, child welfare
and child protective services workers, elected officials, environmental
scientists, industrial hygienists, federal agencies' staff, and
community coalition members.
NAMSDL's National Working Group on Cleanup and Remediation of
Methamphetamine Laboratory Sites
As an additional response to states' growing concerns and requests
for assistance, NAMSDL agreed to draft a model act or model guidelines
for the cleanup and remediation of methamphetamine laboratory sites.
Given the growing concern re: cleanup and remediation issues, variety
of approaches among the states, the increasing number of states dealing
with former meth lab sites, and the changing nature of the labs (e.g.,
increasing number of apartments, houses, trailers, hotels), NAMSDL
identified experts working on these issues in a variety of states and
convened a national working group on cleanup and remediation of meth
lab sites. This working group includes chemists, industrial hygienists,
researchers, environmental toxicologists, public health experts, and
other state agency officials at various levels of addressing these
issues in the states. Working group members also represent a group of
states that are both geographically diverse and at differing stages of
addressing issues related to meth; for example, states that have been
working on cleanup and remediation issues for many years such as
Washington and Oregon as well as states newer to these issues such as
North Carolina are included among the working group's membership.
Members have met to consider the common issues, recurring questions,
and research needed to best set standards for decontamination of meth
lab sites and the resulting legal and policy implications.
Overview of Current States' Efforts--Legislation, Policy, and
Guidelines
Concerns related to the cleanup and remediation of former
methamphetamine laboratory sites (also referred to as clandestine
laboratories) are frequently expressed to NAMSDL staff by our contacts
in the states working to address these issues. In preparation for the
National Methamphetamine Legislative and Policy Conference and the
convening of our National Working Group on Cleanup and Remediation of
Methamphetamine Laboratory Sites, NAMDSL conducted legislative research
of existing statutes, regulations, operating policies, and guidelines
related to the decontamination of these sites.
New statutes, regulations, local ordinances, and guidelines
relating to the cleanup and remediation of methamphetamine laboratories
continue to emerge. State and local governments are working to address
different aspects of the indoor and outdoor environmental issues
associated with clandestine laboratories. A few states have been
dealing with the environmental contamination of these drug laboratory
sites head-on for many years and have significant statutory and
regulatory provisions in place. Others on the federal, State, and local
level have more recently begun to address these concerns.
Note Regarding NAMSDL's Research
Please note that our research is ongoing in this arena.
Additionally, we understand that we may not be currently familiar with
all of the different categories of laws that states may be using for
cleanup and remediation because of the wide breadth of this issue.
NAMSDL continues to collect numerous cleanup ordinances from local
governments that cannot currently be obtained through our legal
research database.
Additionally, please note that a number of states have put together
guidelines or guidance documents for the cleanup and remediation of
methamphetamine laboratories. We have defined certain documents as
guidelines based on the content provided (see attachments of states'
specific examples). Documents we are considering guidelines are those
that contain detailed scientific sampling information and remediation
standards for methamphetamine. Guidelines do not have the force of law
by themselves but in some instances, for example, local governments
have passed ordinances requiring cleanup contractors to abide by the
procedures and cleanup standards that the guidelines establish. Some of
the more comprehensive guidelines include information on chemical
toxicity, laboratory analytical methods, asbestos guidelines, and field
and sampling guidelines. Those documents that may have the term
``guideline'' in the title but we have considered them as ``guidance
documents'' are those that tend to be less detailed in nature and do
not address a remediation standard for methamphetamine.
Scope of Statutes
Based on a review of existing state statutes specifically relating
to the cleanup and remediation of clandestine laboratories, the
application of the cleanup and remediation provisions varies from state
to state and is determined by the type of substance being illegally
manufactured. Some states only address the manufacture of
methamphetamine. Other state statutes apply to the manufacture of
controlled substances generally, as they are defined in the state code,
or more specifically to ``schedule I or II controlled substances.'' In
addition to the above listed, some states also include the
manufacturing of ecstasy and LSD. Thus, it appears that some states are
focused specifically on the illegal manufacture of methamphetamine
whereas other states have taken a broader approach in their statutory
language.
Use of Contractors for Cleanup and Remediation
Several state cleanup laws and regulations address the use of a
state-approved environmental cleanup contractor and/or a certified
industrial or environmental hygienist. Only three states, however, have
tackled by statute or regulation the contractor and employee training
and certification in detail. In Washington, Oregon, and Arizona, not
only does the contractor need to be certified, but the employees and
supervisors must all go through a specific training and certification
process. According to NAMSDL's contacts within these states, stricter
enforcement is needed with respect to the monitoring of contractors and
ensuring that they are using certified employees and proper remediation
and sampling procedures. Part of the process for monitoring the
contractors is the requirement of some type of work plan to be
submitted to the overseeing agency. A few states currently require by
statute or regulation a work plan to be prepared by the contractor. A
work plan may include photographs and/or drawings and a written
description of the contaminated property, procedures for the
decontamination process, a description of the personal protective
equipment that will be used, health and safety procedures, and a list
of post-decontamination testing that will be completed. In addition to
above discussed training and certification requirements, Washington has
also established a training provider certification process.
Standards for Decontamination
Currently, approximately seven states have established--by statute,
regulation or guideline--a feasibility-based decontamination standard
specific to methamphetamine. Feasibility-based is a cost-comparative
term used to determine what the economics are of cleaning a meth lab;
simply put, ``how much do we want to spend to clean it up?'' Those
states include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Minnesota,
Tennessee, and Washington. The two most commonly provided measurements
are 0.1mg/100cm2 and 0.5mg/ft2. There is an
ongoing debate about the effectiveness of using a feasibility-based
standard. Because research into the long-term health effects associated
with clandestine laboratories has just recently begun, health or risk
based standards have not been determined yet. These standards are
usually determined by asking, ``to what level do we need to minimize
(clean) a contaminant in order to prevent the average person from
having adverse health effects (e.g., become sick)?'' This is based upon
the toxicology of a compound, the concentration of the contaminant, and
the amount of time a person will be exposed to that concentration.
Minus the research needed to set these standards, states are relying on
the limited research available to determine the appropriate
feasibility-based standard that must be met by a cleanup contractor
and/or industrial hygienist in order to certify that a property has
been decontaminated.
Property Notices re: Former Meth Lab Sites
There are also several notice issues involved in the cleanup and
remediation of properties contaminated by clandestine laboratories. A
few states have statutory and/or regulatory provisions that require a
particular agency to maintain a list of contaminated properties and/or
a list of certified contractors that must be available to the public. A
property is generally removed from the contamination list once it is
certified by the appropriate entity as decontaminated. Another issue
relates to the notifying of the county recorder's office that a
property has been deemed contaminated. In Washington, the local health
officer is required to file a copy of an order prohibiting the use of a
property with the county auditor. If, after the remediation process is
complete, the local health officer determines that the property has
been decontaminated, s/he is required to record a release for reuse
document in the real property records of the county auditor where the
property is located. The county auditor provisions are located within
the purview of the chapter on the decontamination of illegal drug
manufacturing or storage sites. Additional states may have similar
statutory and regulatory provisions relating to the recording of
property contamination in other parts of the state code.
Numerous states have become concerned with presently or formerly
contaminated properties being sold, transferred, or rented without the
buyer or occupant being made aware of the status of the property. Such
disclosure issues and restriction on the transfer of the property have
been addressed in many different areas of the state code. Arizona,
Alaska, and Oregon, in particular, address this issue within the
purview of their cleanup laws and regulations. The statutes and/or
regulations generally require the seller to notify the buyer in writing
that illegal drug manufacturing occurred on the premises. A buyer then
may cancel the purchase contract within a certain number of days after
receiving notice of the property's status. In Oregon, if the seller
fails to properly notify the buyer, the buyer may bring suit to recover
damages for any losses. In Arizona, the seller is subject to civil
penalties for any harm that was caused for his/her failure to comply
with its notice requirements.
Local Ordinances
As mentioned earlier, numerous local governments (e.g., cities,
municipalities) have passed ordinances that relate to the cleanup of
methamphetamine laboratories. Some of the ordinances address nuisance
and local building code issues. Other ordinances address cleanup and
remediation directly. Ordinances can be found both in states that
already have related statutes and regulations as well as in states that
have not yet addressed the issue at the State level.
Current Considerations for NAMSDL's Drafting of a Model Act/Guidelines
From the discussions of this working group, existing research that
the members have identified, and review of existing laws, policies,
guidelines, and ordinances, NAMSDL has drafted the following outline
for members' consideration at their final meeting at the end of April
2005. This preliminary outline suggests key components to be addressed
in a model act or model guidelines that NAMSDL might draft:
State Agency Authority:
oversight of cleanup program (with designated
responsibilities to local health departments in regulation
probably)
set requirement for owner to clean property
to promulgate related regulation
keep database of properties deemed to be contaminated
keep list of certified contractors and approved
laboratories
Notification responsibilities:
first responder/law enforcement/local health officer/
building code officer/local county property records office
owner
posting on property
Contractors/Industrial Hygienists:
certification
training
site safety responsibilities
monitoring of contractors work
Preliminary Assessment and Work Plan
Decontamination Procedures
for walls, furniture, ventilation system, variety of
surfaces
waste characterization and disposal
Confirmation of Decontamination:
decontamination standards
sampling methods
laboratory analytical testing
After receiving feedback from the National Working Group on Cleanup
and Remediation of Meth Lab Sites, the drafting committee of NAMSDL's
Board of Directors will complete the draft model act/guidelines. Once
the draft is approved by the Board, NAMSDL will distribute the
resulting model to our contacts in the states, including Governors and
Attorneys General. The model will also be posted on NAMSDL's website
(www.natlalliance.org).
Additional Research Is Needed
Working group members agree that informed, effective, health-based
standards for cleanup and remediation cannot be established until more
is known about the short- and long-term health and environmental
consequences of meth production. A consistent theme from the working
group's discussions is the need for further research. At their most
recent meeting, these members concluded that research needs to occur on
the following multiple tracks:
Health-based studies (short- and long-term)
Health-based cleanup standards
Scientifically validated sample collection methods
Scientifically validated remediation
Examples of specific research needs within these tracks suggested
by the working group members include: identifying the primary chemicals
of concern (COCs), determining persistent COCs, determining if meth
should be the only indicator chemical, establishing the most effective
remediation technique for a variety of surfaces (e.g., porous, semi-
porous, nonporous), and indoor air assessments over time. Any research
that addresses these concerns and questions would greatly benefits
states' efforts related to decontamination of former meth lab sites.
Concluding Remarks
NAMSDL considers all of the Commission's model laws to be ``living
and breathing'' documents that can offer guidance to states over time
by incorporating new findings as necessary. The model act or guidelines
that will emerge from the working group process and the Board's
drafting will also be viewed as such. NAMSDL will incorporate the
findings of new research and new developments in the science related to
decontamination of meth lab sites into any model act/guidelines that is
drafted for states' reference.
Thank you once again for the opportunity to share this information
with you. I would be happy to answer any questions that you have as the
hearing proceeds.
Biography for Sherry L. Green
Sherry L. Green helped co-found the National Alliance for Model
State Drug Laws (Alliance) in 1993 to promote the model state laws
promulgated by the President's Commission on Model State Drug Laws
(Commission). Ms. Green currently serves as Executive Director of the
Alliance and was formerly the Associate Director of the Commission. As
Associate Director, she was a primary co-author and editor of the
Commission's five volume Final Report containing 44 model laws and
policies on enforcement, education, prevention, treatment and community
issues.
As Director of the Alliance, Ms. Green has established a
legislative clearinghouse used by governors, state legislators,
attorneys general and substance abuse specialists to track adoption of
model law-related bills, monitor trends in drug and alcohol abuse
policies, and identify pertinent studies, reports and programs.
Additionally, she has created a national network of experts who provide
technical assistance to state leaders on the model laws and drug and
alcohol abuse policies. As a member of the network, Ms. Green drafts
and analyzes legislation, assists with policy development, offers
guidance on legal, technical and programmatic issues, facilitates
formation of multi-disciplinary coalitions, and conducts or
participates in legislative briefings, summits, and workshops. Ms.
Green also makes numerous presentations on the model laws to national
and state organizations and agencies.
Previously, Ms. Green spent eight years specializing in state
legislative research and policy, analysis, drafting and education. She
served as an Attorney with the American Prosecutors Research Institute
(APRI), where she managed the model drug legislation project. During
her tenure with APRI, she co-authored the State Drug Laws for the 90s
resource book. Ms. Green established and served on the Uniform
Controlled Substance Act (UCSA) Task Force which produced model
legislation adopted by the National Conference of Commissioners on
Uniform State Laws. Additionally, the Forfeiture Task Force wrote a
model act passed in whole or in part by several states, including
Louisiana, Georgia, Hawaii, and Arkansas. Prior to her work with the
Institute, Ms. Green clerked for a D.C. Superior Court Judge and
analyzed child support laws for the American Bar Association.
Ms. Green brings to her legislative work a background in law. She
received her Juris Doctor from the George Washington University's
National Law Center and is a member of the D.C. Bar. Ms. Green also
received a Bachelor's degree in Political Science-Economics from the
University of Montana.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Dr. Martyny.
STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN W. MARTYNY, PH.D., C.I.H., SENIOR
INDUSTRIAL HYGIENIST, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SCIENCES, NATIONAL JEWISH MEDICAL AND
RESEARCH CENTER
Dr. Martyny. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, first
I would like to thank you very much for affording me this
opportunity to come here and give you an idea of what we are
finding in the research that we are conducting looking at
chemical exposures in these illegal methamphetamine
laboratories.
I have submitted written testimony, which gives you a lot
more detail than I could go into in the next five minutes, and
I hope that will become part of the record. But I will try to
summarize some of the things that we found, and really give you
an idea of how important these exposures could actually be.
We were initially contacted by local law enforcement in
Colorado, and they were concerned because a number of their law
enforcement individuals were going into these labs and
reporting symptoms. About 50 percent of law enforcement
officers going into these labs will have some problem when they
come out of the lab. Typically, it might be as easy as burning
eyes, burning nose and throat, but can be much worse. In some
cases, officers actually have to go to the hospital. We have
several officers that have been taken to the hospital after
responding to these methamphetamine labs.
We were very, very lucky in that law enforcement allowed us
to go with them, actually out to the labs. We went in right
behind them, actually a little ways behind them, just to make
sure. And we quickly got to look at the contamination that is
in these labs and the chemicals that the police are exposed to.
We were also extremely lucky and fortunate in that the Drug
Enforcement Administration was able to work with us and allow
us to do our own cook. So to date, we have done quite a few
meth cooks using the different methodologies of cooking meth
and trying to decide what kind of exposures we really have. And
I have to tell you, we have been very surprised. Generally
speaking, the chemicals that are used result in extremely high
concentrations of exposure to iodine, hydrogen chloride,
phosphine gas, and anhydrous ammonia, actually levels that
exceed what NIOSH, the National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health, considers to be immediately dangerous to
life and health during the actual cook. So these are not
trivial exposures.
The bad thing is that these exposures move not from just
the area that the cook is but throughout the house or
throughout the building where the cook has occurred, and in
fact, we were able to do one cook in a hotel room and found out
that we actually had the exposures move to each room bordering
that particular room, which is a real concern for us, because
now we are talking about not only the people doing the cook,
but also third parties.
When we were going into the actual labs themselves, the one
thing that we found is virtually every lab that is contaminated
with methamphetamine itself, the methamphetamine is essentially
all throughout the lab, on the walls, floors, ceiling, in the
carpeting. It moves well outside the cook area, and really
offers contamination--or offers people to get exposed that were
not even remotely concerned with the methamphetamine cook. So
we get very, very concerned about third parties. We get very,
very concerned about children that may not be present during
the cook but, in fact, come into the house after the cook into
an extremely contaminated house. Recently, the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment has looked at a lot
of the data that we have accumulated with types of
contamination we see well after the cook and has found that the
toxicologists would expect kids exposed to those levels to
actually show permanent damage, especially to the respiratory
tract, possibly to the nervous system, and so we are very, very
concerned about this.
As much as we do know, there is a lot that we don't know.
We don't know how long it lasts in the house. Unfortunately,
all of the houses that we have cooked in, we have had to
actually destroy the house right after our cook for liability
purposes. And so we have no idea. Does this last six months, a
year, two years? We don't know.
How do activities reduce exposures in the house? What
happens when you vacuum? If you have got a carpet that is
soaked with methamphetamine, what happens when you vacuum the
house? What are the exposures to the kids and the other people
around? We have done very little on methamphetamine clean up.
What are the best ways to clean it up? As was mentioned, as
Sherry mentioned, some people feel the house needs to be
destroyed. Some people feel that all that needs to be done is
for it to be aired out. We think that there is a lot to be
learned there.
We would really hope that we can count on your support for
this bill. We are really interested in bringing EPA into the
arena. We would also like to see the Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) be brought in. CDC is doing some studies now. We
would like to see them do more, looking at why we are seeing
some of these health effects for people that--even occupying
just houses that had been used for cooks in the past.
We certainly appreciate the support of NIST being able to
look at new methodologies and also the National Academy of
Sciences.
I do have a short film clip that I would like to show you
of a cook that we actually did.
[Film.]
This is a cook using the anhydrous ammonia method of
cooking. And you will see actually a tube here where we
actually are sampling the air to see what levels we have and to
see how--there are tremendous amounts of anhydrous ammonia,
probably around 2,000 parts per million. This is actually
stirring. You can see the anhydrous ammonia is actually coming
off. That was the detector tube. We had about 2,000 when we
pulled that and it was instantly saturated. This is pH tape,
and it is actually changing color just due to the atmosphere in
the house. The pH is so high, it just changes the pH tape
immediately. And this is actually a mixture of hydrogen
chloride and methamphetamine. It is going into the air where
the cook is being conducted.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Martyny follows:]
Prepared Statement of John W. Martyny
My name is John W. Martyny. I am an Associate Professor and an
industrial hygienist at the National Jewish Medical and Research
Center. I also hold the rank of Associate Professor in the Department
of Preventive Medicine at the University of Colorado Denver/Health
Sciences Center. I wish to inform you of recent research that we have
conducted regarding the chemical exposures associated with the
clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine. Our research has indicated
that very high levels of toxic chemicals are produced during
methamphetamine ``cooks;'' and that hazardous chemical exposures can be
expected to persist in rooms and buildings for an extended period of
time.
Prior to discussing our research findings, I wish to acknowledge
the contributions made by many groups in conducting this research. The
study was initiated due to exposure concerns expressed by local law
enforcement officials in Colorado, including the North Metro Task Force
in Denver, Colorado. We also obtained enthusiastic help and assistance
from local and State law enforcement, fire, and emergency services
personnel from Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. I have attached to this
testimony a complete list of participating organizations.
In order to obtain exposure data, we collaborated with agents and
chemists working for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration who
conducted controlled methamphetamine ``cooks'' while we measured the
chemicals being released. Without their help, this information would
not have been obtainable. DEA Administrator Karen P. Tandy has been
very supportive in this effort. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell was
also helpful in providing some initial funding for our effort.
We have received financial support from the U.S. Justice Department
through Community Action Policing Services, the Centers for Disease
Control/National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH),
and HealthOne Foundation of Colorado. We gratefully acknowledge the
help we have received from the National and the Colorado Drug
Endangered Children Coalitions. Full reports of our studies can be
obtained from either of their websites (http://www.colodec.org/ and
http://www.nationaldec.org/).
Introduction
Our nation faces an unprecedented epidemic of clandestine
methamphetamine drug manufacturing. Seizures of methamphetamine drug
laboratories continue to rise, putting police and fire first responders
at risk for a variety of hazards. For example, the number of seizures
in my home State of Colorado has risen dramatically from 31
laboratories in 1998 to 687 laboratories in 2002. First responders and
susceptible third parties, especially children, are at risk for
exposures to the chemical hazards as well as the fire, explosion, and
safety hazards inherent with the clandestine manufacture of
methamphetamine.
Unfortunately, very little research has been conducted regarding
the specific exposure hazards associated with illegal methamphetamine
manufacture. The lack of knowledge has produced four serious problems:
1. Inconsistent medical treatment of chemically exposed individuals:
Because of the lack of information on exposure levels, there has
been very poor information on which to establish appropriate medical
treatment plans. Health care providers providing treatment to
individuals exposed at methamphetamine laboratories were forced to
provide generic, often expensive, and probably to some extent
unnecessary, medical testing.
2. Inconsistent recommendations for protection of emergency service
and law enforcement workers:
The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) by emergency
services and law enforcement personnel has varied widely by
jurisdiction due to the lack of information regarding chemical
exposures at the sites. Some jurisdictions utilize self-contained
breathing apparatus (masks with air tanks worn on the back) and
chemical-protective suits while neighboring jurisdictions use no
respiratory protection or chemical-protective suits at all. Other
agencies switch from self-contained breathing apparatus to air-
purifying respirators (face masks with filters) after the initial
assessment, while some agencies remain in the highest levels of
protection. These inconsistencies are due to a lack of information from
scientifically-based studies of the exposure risks while conducting
these operations.
3. Preventable injuries and illness occurring among emergency service
and law enforcement workers:
Even though many agencies use some form of PPE, there are
increasing reports of emergency service and law enforcement personnel
being injured while conducting investigations at clandestine
methamphetamine laboratories. The Centers for Disease Control reported
59 events between 1996 and 1999, associated with methamphetamine labs
where emergency services personnel were injured during the
investigation. The number of injured responders was 155, with the most
predominant symptom reported being respiratory irritation.
Studies conducted by Dr. Jeffrey Burgess, while at the University
of Washington, investigated the symptoms reported by emergency
responders during illegal methamphetamine laboratory seizures.
Responders predominately reported general irritant symptoms, but least
one case of phosphine gas exposure (a gas that may be lethal at low
concentrations) was reported. In a questionnaire study of emergency
responders, 53.8 percent reported at least one illness while conducting
laboratory seizures with most symptoms appearing to be related to
chemical exposure at the laboratory site. The primary symptoms reported
were headache and mucous membrane irritation.
Although the predominant symptoms were irritant symptoms, a number
of responders were found to have an accelerated decline in their
ability to breathe (determined by a breathing test which measures how
fast they can blow air out of their lungs) that may have been related
to work in drug laboratories. The majority of symptoms reported by
officers occurred during the processing phase of the laboratory
seizures but this phase was also the phase in which the most time was
spent in the laboratory area. The use of respiratory protection did
seem to reduce the incidence of symptoms while investigating these
laboratories. There has also been anecdotal evidence of these chemical
exposures causing permanent lung damage, but the actual cases have not
been reported in the literature.
4. Inadequate hazards training and education of emergency services and
law enforcement personnel:
If the exposures encountered in methamphetamine laboratories are
not known, then it is difficult to properly educate personnel about the
risks they may encounter when entering an illegal laboratory. Although
the chemicals used in the production of methamphetamine are well known,
first responders do not know which of these chemicals by themselves or
in combination may be harmful and what routes of exposure present the
most severe risks. Industrial hygienists commonly approach such
problems by quantifying the actual exposures using air sampling,
modeling, and in some cases teamed with occupational environmental
medical specialists using biological markers (chemical traces in urine
or blood, for example) to determine what the exposure has been. Major
exposure assessment issues include individual chemical characteristics
as well as potentially complex interactions of chemicals that might
result in unusual and potentially very toxic mixtures.
Summary of our research findings
Our research was designed to determine the potential chemical
exposures to law enforcement and emergency services personnel
responding to clandestine methamphetamine laboratory seizures. As our
research continued, however, we became increasingly concerned, as well,
about the potential exposures to third party individuals that were
incidentally exposed to these laboratories. Chief among these are
concerns was the health and well being of the children associated with
these laboratories. Approximately one third of the methamphetamine
laboratories investigated by law enforcement involve children. In
addition, there have been instances of families unknowingly moving into
a building that had previously been a methamphetamine laboratory. The
occurrence of a clandestine ``cook'' was only evident after significant
lung problems were diagnosed in the children.
Methodologies
Our research has consisted of two phases; a series of controlled
``cooks'' documenting exposures during differing manufacturing methods
and the sampling of conditions present at a number of laboratories
being investigated by law enforcement officers. The controlled
``cooks'' were designed to determine the levels of contamination
associated with the ``cooks'' and the area over which these exposures
are spread. The sampling of laboratory investigations was conducted in
order to determine residual exposures present after the ``cooks'' have
been conducted.
The controlled methamphetamine ``cooks'' were conducted in three
residences and a hotel that were slated for demolition. These ``cooks''
were conducted by law enforcement chemists using similar chemicals and
equipment, and under similar conditions typically observed in
clandestine laboratories. Two of the ``cooks'' were conducted using the
red phosphorous reduction method and two used the Birch method, which
uses anhydrous ammonia and lithium metal to produce methamphetamine.
Airborne sampling for hydrochloric acid, iodine, phosphine, and
anhydrous ammonia was conducted using methods specified in the National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Manual of
Analytical Methods. Real-time analysis for hydrochloric acid and
phosphine were also obtained using an ITX Multi-Gas Monitor. Real-time
analysis for anhydrous ammonia was obtained using colorimetric detector
tubes. Airborne and surface levels of methamphetamine were determined
using a method being developed for NIOSH by Data Chem Laboratories in
Salt Lake City, UT. The levels of chemicals observed were compared to
the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygiene (ACGIH)
Threshold Limit Values (TLV) and the NIOSH Immediately Dangerous to
Life and Health Levels (IDLH).
Controlled Cook Results
Red Phosphorous ``Cooks''
The red phosphorous method of producing methamphetamine involves
the use of a number of solvents, iodine, hydrogen chloride gas
(frequently manufactured using sulfuric acid and rock salt (NaCl) ),
red phosphorous, sodium hydroxide, and ephedrine or pseudoephedrine.
This method requires heating of the materials as well as a reasonable
amount of manipulation (filtering and bubbling hydrogen chloride into
the solution) that generally results in significant contamination by
the primary chemicals as well as other chemicals produced by the
combination and heating of the primary chemicals.
Our analysis of the exposures present during red phosphorous
``cooks'' has revealed significant exposures to solvents, phosphine,
iodine, hydrogen chloride, and methamphetamine aerosol. Phosphine is a
gas produced when the solution of iodine, water, ephedrine, and red
phosphorous is heated. It is a gas that may cause severe pulmonary
irritation resulting in pulmonary edema and death. At lower levels
phosphine may cause nausea, vomiting, headache, and chest tightness,
symptoms frequently reported by law enforcement personnel exposed to
these laboratories. Unfortunately, there have also been several deaths
reported in ``cooks'' that have possibly been associated with phosphine
exposures. Our controlled ``cooks'' have resulted in measured phosphine
levels ranging from not detectable to as high as 2.9 ppm, approximately
three times the short-term occupational exposure standard of 1.0 ppm.
Although a seemingly harmless chemical when applied to the skin,
iodine can be very toxic when inhaled. The level of iodine considered
by NIOSH to be Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) is only
two ppm and levels lower than 0.1 ppm are required in the workplace.
After a red phosphorous cook, iodine contamination can generally be
found on many surfaces in the ``cook'' area and we have measured levels
as high as 0.16 ppm in the air during the ``cook.'' The amount present
in the air seems to depend upon the amount of water used during the
``cook'' and the temperature of the ``cook'' with hotter ``cooks''
resulting in higher levels of airborne iodine.
Many different types of solvents are utilized during the production
of methamphetamine. Methanol and ether are commonly used to extract the
pseudoephedrine or ephedrine and Coleman Fuel is commonly used to
separate the methamphetamine base prior to acidification. All of these
chemicals are extremely flammable; and many clandestine methamphetamine
laboratories are found after the explosion and fire. These chemicals
may also cause exposures resulting in nervous system damage as well as
internal organ damage (liver, kidney, etc.). This is especially true
for children with developing nervous systems.
Hydrogen chloride is produced during the acidification phase in all
methamphetamine ``cooks.'' It is typically used to precipitate the
methamphetamine out of the organic solution. It can be produced by
adding aluminum foil to muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) or by mixing
sulfuric acid with rock salt. In either case, large amounts of hydrogen
chloride are produced and become airborne in any red phosphorous
``cook.'' We have found levels as high as 155 ppm during the ``cook''
and average levels of hydrogen chloride are almost always over the
occupational level of 2.0 ppm. This chemical can cause severe upper
respiratory tract damage and may result in permanent lung damage to
adults and especially to children and infants with a growing
respiratory system. The current NIOSH IDLH is 50 ppm, which is the
level that we frequently encounter during these cooks. The potential
for injury due to hydrogen chloride is very high.
While the hydrogen chloride is being used to precipitate the
methamphetamine out of solution, a significant amount of
methamphetamine itself is bubbled out of the solution and into the air.
The methamphetamine can then be found to plate out on surfaces quite
distant from the cook, and levels of methamphetamine as high as 16,000
mg/100 cm2 can be found in houses that were used to produce
methamphetamine. These levels can persist and we typically find as much
as 300 mg/100 cm2 in homes that were used for
methamphetamine production, even as long as six months after the last
use. Airborne levels of methamphetamine may be as high as 5000 mg/
m3 during the cook and almost assures that anyone in the
vicinity of the cook will test positive for methamphetamine, even
infants. Due to this widespread deposition of methamphetamine
throughout the house, virtually all items within the house as well as
all people, pets, toys, etc., become contaminated with methamphetamine.
In general, anyone present during the clandestine production of
methamphetamine using the red phosphorous method is highly likely to
become exposed to toxic levels of phosphine, hydrogen chloride, iodine,
solvents, and to high levels of the drug itself. These levels will be
exceptionally high for children and infants who, due to their
developing physiology and their inquisitive oral habits, will be
exposed to high levels of these chemicals at a very sensitive time of
their development. The final cost to these children may not be
identified for many years to come.
Anhydrous Ammonia ``Cooks''
The anhydrous ammonia ``cooks'' differ from the red phosphorous
``cooks'' in that they use anhydrous ammonia and a reactive metal
(lithium or sodium) instead of red phosphorous and iodine. This method
of production still produces significant amounts of solvents, hydrogen
chloride and methamphetamine but phosphine and iodine are not produced.
The levels of anhydrous ammonia that are produced during these
``cooks'' are significantly above NIOSH IDLH levels and the likelihood
of serious injury to the respiratory system is high. Ammonia levels
easily reach 1000 ppm with average levels of 500 ppm common. The
current NIOSH IDLH is 300 ppm, well below the levels that we observe
during the ``cooks.'' Adults exposed to these levels may be expected to
have injury to the respiratory system as well as eye damage. The
reactions of children and infants can be expected to be much greater
and to persist for longer periods.
Conclusions
Our studies indicate that methamphetamine production and use will
have far-reaching effects upon the individuals using this drug, their
children, others in the vicinity, and even individuals moving into the
``cook'' areas well after the cook has moved on to another area. It is
unlike the use of many drugs in that there is not only an exposure to
the drug itself, but also to the hazardous and toxic chemicals used for
the drug's production. It is almost a given that the following will
occur:
The cook and anyone assisting the cook will be
exposed to a number of chemicals (phosphine, hydrogen chloride,
iodine, anhydrous ammonia, and solvents) at levels that are
above those allowed by law in occupational settings and, in
some cases, above those levels determined to be ``immediately
dangerous to life and health.''
Third party bystanders, including children and
infants, are likely to be exposed to levels of those same
chemicals that may cause severe and long-lasting health
concerns. This is especially true of children and infants who
are rapidly growing and more susceptible to chemical exposures
in the home environment.
Law enforcement, fire, and emergency services
personnel may be exposed to high levels of these chemicals as
they investigate clandestine methamphetamine laboratories. This
is especially true if they enter an area where a laboratory is
in operation but also may be true if the laboratory is not in
operation at the time. Residual chemicals deposited on surfaces
of the house as well as boxes of chemicals stored in the house
may result in significant exposures to investigating personnel.
The area used to produce methamphetamine and
surrounding areas will be contaminated with a number of
chemicals including hydrogen chloride, iodine, solvents, and
the methamphetamine itself. Levels of these compounds may
remain in the area for an extended period of time (at least six
months) and may result in exposures to individuals that were
not associated with the ``cook'' and, in fact, never knew of
the existence of the methamphetamine production.
What Don't We Know?
What are the long-term health effects for exposed children?
In spite of all we do know about the potential effects of
methamphetamine production on the community, there is still much that
we don't know. At this time we do not have much information on the
long-lasting health effects caused by exposure to clandestine
methamphetamine laboratories. This may seem like information that is
easily obtainable, but several factors have limited our knowledge in
this area. The explosion of these clandestine laboratories has occurred
during the last 10 years and has been studied for even a shorter
period. This combined with laws limiting the collection of health
information from individuals has hampered our ability to track exposed
individuals for long periods of time.
Information regarding long-term effects in children is especially
needed, since the knowledge of potential physiologic and psychological
conditions resulting from these exposures in children may help in our
treatment for these individuals. Some physicians and psychologists
working with methamphetamine lab exposed children have reported
significant concerns that seem to be unique to this exposure. Indeed,
since almost all of the children from these laboratories test positive
for the drug itself, which we have found on most surfaces of the house,
exposure to the other chemicals is also likely. Many of these chemicals
can be related to pulmonary problems such as asthma and pulmonary
fibrosis as well as liver and nervous system damage. The drug itself is
a neurological agent that can result in significant psychological
conditions in adults using the drug. Are these same conditions possible
in the exposed children? Is it possible that even more severe
developmental, psychosocial, and physical effects may occur in children
exposed over a long period of time? We know that the brain undergoes
significant changes in early childhood. Does exposure to
methamphetamine at this time result in significant effects upon brain
development that will not be recognized until later in life?
What are the long-term chemical exposures associated with
methamphetamine laboratories?
As part of the process in determining the effect of methamphetamine
and its precursor chemicals on children, we need to determine the
magnitude of the exposures to children present in a home not only
during, but after the ``cook'' has taken place. To date, we have only
conducted controlled cooks in structures that were slated to be
demolished within the next few days. This was done to reduce liability
for people entering the structure after the ``cook.'' We now need to
conduct controlled ``cooks'' in structures located in a secure location
so that we can follow the exposures over time. What chemical exposures
exist in the house a day after the cook? What about a month after the
cook? Are the exposures associated with the house at a year post-
``cook'' still dangerous? How do normal activities such as vacuuming,
cleaning, cooking and other activities affect these exposures? How do
the potential exposures to infants crawling around the house differ
from the exposures to adults? All of these questions are important in
determining the potential health effects to look for in children as
well as other adults residing in the building.
What are the best methodologies to use to control the spread of
chemical contamination into the community?
Currently law enforcement agencies that take evidence, suspects,
and children out of a suspected methamphetamine laboratory are
confronted with decontaminating the individuals and materials. Some
agencies conduct the decontamination on-site and others transport the
individuals to a hospital for decontamination. In some cases,
individuals have been transported without decontamination and hospital
personnel have become ill from the exposures. What is the best
methodology to use for decontamination? Which decontamination methods
result in the least amount of trauma for children associated with
methamphetamine labs? We have been told that a child able to take his
or her favorite toy or object from the house may suffer much less
trauma. Are there ways that this can be done? Can we make
decontamination child friendly? These are questions that, when
answered, may make a drug raid much less traumatic for the children
innocently involved.
What are the risks of moving into a house that has been used as a
methamphetamine lab?
We currently know that individuals moving into a home that has been
used as a methamphetamine laboratory often have respiratory problems.
This is especially true of children or adults with asthma or other
respiratory problems. At this time we do not know what chemicals cause
these symptoms, although many involved in the process affect the
respiratory system. We do know that these houses seem to have elevated
levels of methamphetamine but we have not tested the homes for other
compounds that may cause respiratory symptoms.
What is the best methodology to use in decontaminating a residence that
has been used as a clandestine methamphetamine laboratory?
To date a number of states have developed standards and
methodologies for the cleanup of methamphetamine labs. These standards
vary from state to state although many states have similar standards.
Are there specific remediation steps that should be taken in all
decontamination efforts? What decontamination procedures result in the
lowest residual level of chemicals in the house? At what chemical
levels should most people be unaffected? Should we base the
decontamination on methamphetamine levels as is currently the practice
in most states or should we look for other chemicals? These questions
need to be answered in order to determine when the decontamination
program is complete and to prevent unnecessarily expensive
decontamination.
As these questions get answered, there will undoubtedly be more
questions as we begin to understand the complexity of this drug and its
manufacture on society.
How will this bill help?
Voluntary guidelines for remediation. The ``Methamphetamine Remediation
Research Act of 2005'' sets into motion several programs. It requires
the U.S. EPA to establish voluntary guidelines for the remediation of
previous clandestine methamphetamine laboratories. These guidelines
will be able to combine the best of all of the existing State
guidelines and provide a national guideline that will be available to
all states, especially those that are new to the problem. The result
will be more uniform remediation guidelines for the states that allow
homeowners to more easily understand what is necessary to decontaminate
their property. Additionally, a standard could unify potential
practices for insurance providers, cleanup, disposal and remediation
companies.
Further research. The bill also requires that the EPA support research
so that we can begin to answer some of the questions previously
mentioned as well as others. At this time, very little funding is being
directed at what has become a national problem. Concerns regarding
methamphetamine laboratories can be found in the media on a daily basis
and many public concerns can't be adequately answered at this time. The
bill may also provide funds that will allow us to scientifically
determine the serious health effects associated with methamphetamine
manufacture that at this time we are only able to identify through
anecdotal observations by medical and psychological professionals.
Knowledge of the potential effects may help us help the children and
infants innocently involved with this drug so that they are not medical
or sociological burdens upon society later in their lives. The
provision requiring EPA to coordinate research with the National
Academy of Science will enable research to move forward in a directed
fashion. The emphasis on the biological effect on children and first
responders is especially noteworthy.
Better dissemination of better information. The bill requires that the
information gathered by the EPA be disseminated to the states on a
routine basis. This is extremely important since the dissemination of
current information to all interested individuals is very important in
establishing a uniform methodology of combating this national problem.
This technology transfer must be accomplished on a regular and frequent
basis to assure that the information is well used.
Better detection methods. The development of new testing methods may
also be important to the determination of the risks involved in
previous methamphetamine labs as well as identifying those laboratories
in the field. In order to be effective, however, any new methods that
are developed must be validated and standardized to assure that they
provide accurate results in a timely fashion.
In closing, I appreciate the opportunity to acquaint you with the
results of our research and the belief that we have regarding the
importance of reducing this community hazard. Since beginning this
work, it has been my privilege to meet many dedicated individuals that
have devoted their time and efforts to protecting society and
especially children from the potentially devastating effects of these
clandestine methamphetamine labs. Much of the work in this area has
been conducted by individuals on their own time and at their own
expense. This shows the dedication of the many law enforcement, social
services, public health, emergency services, and research people
working on this problem today. Thank you again for your time.
Individuals and agencies participating in this project:
National Jewish Medical and Research Center
Dr. Lee Newman
Dr. Roxana Witter
Shawn Arbuckle
Nicola Erb
Michael Van Dyke
Tri-County Health Department
Dr. Charles McCammon
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Eric Esswein
Jane McCammon
North Metro Task Force
Lt. Lori Moriarty
Sgt. Jim Gerhardt
Lynn Riemer
U.S. Department of Justice
Laura Birkmeyer
Ron Mullens
David Love
North Metro Fire Department
Rich Randall
Colorado Department of Public Safety
Trinidad Police Department
Denver Police Department
Colorado Springs Police Department
New Mexico State Highway Patrol
Albuquerque Police Department
Albuquerque Fire Department
South Adams Fire Department
Colorado Alliance for Drug Endangered Children
National Alliance for Drug Endangered Children
Thornton Police Department
Adams County Sheriff's Department
Broomfield Police Department
Biography for John W. Martyny
Education/Training
Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; B.S., 1968, Zoology
Humboldt State University, Arcata, California; M.S., 1974, Wildlife
Biology
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado; Ph.D., 1987,
Environmental Health
Positions and Honors
Professional Positions
1974-83 Environmentalist IV, Supervising Environmentalist, Tri-County
District Health Department, Aurora, Colorado
1983-84 Graduate Teaching Assistant, Colorado State University, Fort
Collins, Colorado
1984-86 Graduate Research Assistant, Colorado State University, Fort
Collins, Colorado
1986 Certified in the Comprehensive Practice of Industrial Hygiene,
American Board of Industrial Hygiene
1986-01 Senior Environmental Health Consultant, Tri-County Health
Department, Commerce City, Colorado
1993- Assistant Clinical Professor, University of Colorado Health
Sciences Center, Denver, Colorado
2001- Associate Professor, National Jewish Medical and Research
Center, Denver, Colorado
Honors
1975 Colorado Environmental Health Association Presidential Citations
1977 Colorado Environmental Health Association Presidential Citations
1978 Colorado Public Health Association P.W. Jacoe Award for
Excellence in Environmental Health
1979 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Improvement
Award
1996- Adjunct Faculty Member, College of Veterinary Medicine and
Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University
Selected Peer-Reviewed Publications
Martyny JW. Listeriae and yersinea in Roosevelt Elk (Cervus canadensis
roosevelti). M.S. thesis, Humboldt State University, Arcata,
California 1974.
Martyny JW, Botzler RG. Listeria monocytogenes isolated from wapiti
(Cervus canadensis roosevelti). J Wildl Dis 1975; 11:330-334.
Martyny JW, Botzler RG. Yersinea isolated from wapiti (Cervus
canadensis roosevelti). J. Wildl Dis 1976; 12:386-389.
Martyny JW, Kennerson D, Wilson B, Lott CE. Landfill-associated methane
gas: A threat to public safety. J Environ Health 1979; 41:194-
197.
Martyny JW. Outcomes of an educational component in an OSHA on-site
consultation program. Ph.D. Dissertation. Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colorado 1987.
Martyny JW, Buchan RM, Keefe TJ, Blehm KD. Impact of an OSHA on-site
consultation program with an educational component on small
businesses in Colorado. AIHA 1988; 3:F12-F15.
Valway SE, Martyny JW, Miller JR, Cook M, Mangione EJ. Lead absorption
in indoor firing range users. Am J Public Health 1989; 79:1029-
1032.
Kreiss K, Mroz MM, Zhen B, Martyny JW, Newman LS. The epidemiology of
beryllium sensitization and disease in nuclear workers. Am Rev
Respir Dis 1993; 148:985-991.
Epling CA, Rose CS, Martyny JW, Zhen B, Alexander W, Waldron JA, Kreiss
K. Epidemic work-related febrile respiratory illness among
construction workers. Am J Ind Med 1995; 28:193-205.
Kreiss K, Mroz MM, Newman LS, Martyny J, Zhen B. Machining risk of
beryllium disease and sensitization with median exposures below
2 mg/m3. Am J Ind Med 1996; 30:16-25.
Rose CS, Martyny JW, Newman LS, Milton DK, King TE, Beebe JL, McCammon
JB, Hoffman RE, Kreiss K. ``Lifeguard Lung'': Endemic
Granulomatous Pneumonitis in an indoor swimming pool. Am J
Public Health 1998; 88:1795-1800.
Sanderson W, Henneberger P, Martyny J, Ellis K, Mroz M, Newman L.
Beryllium contamination inside vehicles of machine shop
workers. Am J Ind Med 1999; Suppl 1:72-74.
Martyny JW, Rose C. 1999. Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Bioaerosols from
Indoor Warm Water Sources Cause Granulomatous Lung Disease.
Proc. 8th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and
Climate, Edinburgh, Scotland, August, 1999. pp: 483-488.
Martyny JW, Martinez K, Morey P. Source Sampling. In: Macher J., ed.
Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control. ACGIH, Cincinnati, OH
1999.
Martyny JW, Hoover M, Mroz M, Ellis K, Bartelson B, Maier L, Newman L.
1999. Aerosols Generated During Beryllium Machining. J Occup
Env Med 42(1):8-18.
Van Dyke M, LaMontagne D, Martyny JW, Ruttenber J. 2001. Development of
an Exposure Database and Surveillance System for Use by
Practicing OSH Professionals. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 16(2):135-
143.
Ruttenber AJ, McCrea JS, Wade TD, Schonbeck MF, LaMontagne AD, Van Dyke
MV, Martyny JW. 2001. Integrating Workplace Exposure Databases
for Occupational Medicine Services and Epidemiologic Studies at
a Former Nuclear Weapons Facility. Applied Occup Environ Hyg
16(2):192-200.
LaMontagne AD, Van Dyke MV, Martyny JW, Ruttenber AJ. 2001. Cleanup
Worker Exposures Hazardous Chemicals at a Former Nuclear
Weapons Plant: Piloting of an Exposure Surveillance System.
Appl Occup Environ Hyg 16(2):284-290.
Kelleher PC, Martyny JW, Mroz MM, Maier LA, Ruttenber AJ, Young DA,
Newman LS. 2000. Beryllium Particulate Exposure and Disease
Relations in a Beryllium Machining Plant. Occup Environ Med
43(3):238-249.
Ruttenber AJ, Schonbeck BS, McCrea BS, McClure D, Martyny JW. 2001.
Improving Estimates of Exposures for Epidemiologic Studies of
Plutonium Workers. Occupational Medicine: State of the Art
Reviews 16(2):239-258.
Kinshella MR, VanDyke MV, Douglas KE, Martyny JW. 2001. Perceptions of
Indoor Air Quality Associated with Ventilation System Types in
Elementary Schools. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 16(10):952-960.
LaMontagne AD, Herrick RF, Van Dyke MV, Martyny JW, Ruttenger AJ. 2002.
Exposure Databases and Exposure Surveillance: Promise and
Practice. AIHA 63(2):205-212.
LaMontagne AD, Van Dyke MV, Martyny JW, Simpson MW, Holwager LA,
Clausen BM, Ruttenber AJ. 2002. Development and Piloting of an
Exposure Database and Surveillance System for DOE Cleanup
Operations. AIHA 63(2):213-224.
Martyny J, Glazer CS, Newman LS. 2002. Current Concepts: Respiratory
Protection. N Engl J Med 347(11):824-830.
Xu P, Peccia J, Fabian P, Martyny J, Fennelly K, Hernandez M, Miller S.
2003. Efficacy of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation of upper-
room air in inactivating airborne bacterial spores and
mycobacteria in full-scale studies. Atmos Environ 37(3):405-
419.
Pacheco KA, McCammon C, Liu AH, Thorne PS, O'Neill ME, Martyny J,
Newman LS, Hamman RF, Rose CS. 2003. Airborne endotoxin
predicts symptoms in non-mouse-sensitized technicians and
research scientists exposed to laboratory mice. American J. of
Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 167:983-990.
Fennelly KP, Martyny JW, Fulton KE, Orme IM, Cave DM, Heifets LB. 2004.
Cough-Generated Aerosols of Micobacteriam tuberculosis: A New
Method to Study Infectiousness. American J. of Respiratory and
Critical Care Medicine, 169:604-609.
Research Support
ONGOING
1. 1 P01 ES011810-01 Newman (PI) 09/12/02-07/31/07
NIEHS
Beryllium: Exposure, Immune and Genetic Mechanisms
Core C
The major goals of this project are to determine the interaction of
beryllium exposure variables and genetic factors leading to immune
reactivity to beryllium and to CBD.
Role: Co-PI
2. Colorado Regional Community Policing Institute Martyny (PI) 07/
15/04-08/30/05
Clantestine Laboratory Research
The major goals of this project are to study the potential chemical
exposures at methamphetamine laboratories with regard to
decontamination of personnel, suspects, and evidence.
Role: PI
3. Cadmus Subcontract 07/07/04-08/30/05
EPA Support for Policy Development, Analysis and Info
The major goals of this project are to develop a web-based mold
remediation course for the U.S. EPA.
COMPLETED
1. CCU 812221A Newman (PI) 09/30/95-09/29/01
CDC/NIOSH
Chronic Beryllium Disease Among Beryllium Exposed Workers
The major goals of this project are to study the dose/response
relationship for development of chronic beryllium disease in a
beryllium machining plant and to characterize the aerosols/particulate
exposure in beryllium machining. To determine the natural history of
beryllium sensitization and disease.
Role: Consultant
2. R01 CCR815751-02 Newman (PI) 07/01/99-06/30/02
NIH
Dose of Beryllium Causing Sensitization and Disease
The major goal of this project is to determine the dose of
beryllium in a metal machining plant that is sufficient to cause
beryllium sensitization and disease.
Role: Co-PI
3. 20-NP-01-36-1 Martyny (PI) 01/01/03-07/31/03
DCJ
Methamphetamine Exposures to Emergency Personnel
The major goal of this project is to determine the chemical
exposures to emergency services personnel investigating clandestine
methamphetamine labs.
Role: PI
4. Health One Alliance Grant 06/30/03-05/31/04
Health One
Meth Exposed Children Program
The major goal of this project is to determine the chemical
exposures to children exposed to clandestine methamphetamine labs.
Role: PI
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Dr. Martyny.
Mr. Hamilton.
STATEMENT OF MR. HENRY L. HAMILTON, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
PUBLIC PROTECTION, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION
Mr. Hamilton. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, on
behalf of Acting Commissioner Sheehan, we want to thank you for
allowing the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation to present its views on the growing issue of
methamphetamine use and manufacture in New York State and on
how H.R. 798 may assist the state with its efforts to stem this
problem.
Under Governor Pataki, New York State law enforcement, and
public safety agencies, including this Department, are
prioritizing a variety of means to stop illegal drug
trafficking in New York State. Because of the Governor's
various criminal justice initiatives, he was able to note in
his 2005 State of the State address that New York is now the
safest large state in the Nation. But the growing threat of
illegal drugs, like methamphetamine, makes it clear that we
must continue to focus resources to quell this threat and
continue our progress in protecting public safety. Governor
Pataki has proposed legislation that would specifically target
clandestine laboratories, also known as clan labs, which
produce illegal drugs. The proposal imposes significant
penalties upon the individuals who operate these labs as well
as those who assist the operators by knowingly procuring,
transporting, or storing the substances or equipment needed.
In New York State, these labs are most frequently located
in rural and semi-rural areas. The rate at which these labs are
proliferating is similar to that which began occurring in the
Midwest during the mid to late 1900s. The slower growth of clan
labs in New York likely stems from the state's ban on the sale
of dietary supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids beginning
in 1996. Similar federal legislation took effect in April of
2004. Without available sources of ephedrine alkaloids, clan
labs have been forced to use products containing
pseudoephedrines, such as over-the-counter decongestants, which
are much more time-consuming to distill.
Nevertheless, methamphetamine use has begun to grow in New
York State, particularly in New York City. This Department's
environmental conservation officers, made up of both uniformed
police officers and plain-clothes investigators, work with
federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies in
investigating these clan labs. In conjunction with these
efforts, the Department's environmental remediation staff
attempt to locate where chemicals from the clan labs have been
disposed and coordinate the removal of chemicals that are an
immediate threat to public health and the environment.
Environmental concerns at clan labs are extensive. A
variety of toxic wastes result from the manufacture of
methamphetamine. These chemicals may migrate into drinking
wells, be drained into septic systems, or be dumped off site.
It is estimated that for each pound of methamphetamine
produced, four to six pounds of toxic waste are generated.
One of the substances of greatest concern in the
manufacture of methamphetamine, of course, is anhydrous
ammonia, used by farmers to fertilize crops. Methamphetamine
manufacturers have been known to steal anhydrous ammonia from
storage tanks on farms and at agricultural outlets in rural
areas. Frequently, they leave the storage tanks open, allowing
the anhydrous ammonia to empty from the tank. Anhydrous
ammonia, as has been said, can cause severe irritation to the
eyes, nose, throat, and lungs, can cause dizziness, chemical
burns, and can seriously affect the central nervous system,
even causing death. And of course, there is a potential for
serious and very adverse environmental impacts.
Indoor environments may become contaminated when the
chemicals and fumes, as we have just seen in the videotape,
formed during methamphetamine production, penetrate or adhere
to porous surfaces, such as upholstery, drapes, linens,
carpeting, wallpaper, and sheetrock. Other surfaces, such as
countertops and floors, can also be contaminated by spills and
emissions.
As a result of these concerns, in August of 2004, Governor
Pataki signed legislation requiring this Department to conduct
a study on whether or not it would be feasible to introduce an
additive into anhydrous ammonia that would prevent it from
being used to manufacture methamphetamine. The statute requires
that the Department issue a report and recommendations by April
1 of next year.
And in that context, we very much look forward to working
with this committee on strategies to address this growing
threat to public health and environmental quality.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing the Department
of Environmental Conservation to provide our comments.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hamilton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Henry L. Hamilton
On behalf of Acting Commissioner Sheehan, I want to thank you for
allowing the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(Department) to present its views on the growing issue of
methamphetamine use and manufacture in New York State, and on how H.R.
798 may assist the State with its efforts to stem this problem. I am
Henry Hamilton, the Department's Assistant Commissioner for Public
Protection.
Under Governor George E. Pataki, New York State law enforcement and
public safety agencies, including the Department, are prioritizing a
variety of means to stem illegal drug trafficking in New York State.
Through the initiatives which New York's criminal justice agencies have
put in place, the Governor was able to note in his 2005 State of the
State address that New York is now the safest large state in the
Nation. But the growing threat of illegal drugs like methamphetamine
makes it clear that we must continue to focus resources to quell this
threat and continue our progress in protecting public safety. Governor
Pataki has proposed legislation that would specifically target
clandestine laboratories (clan labs) which produce illegal drugs. The
proposal also makes possession of specific ingredients used to
illegally manufacture controlled substances with the intent to
manufacture such controlled substances a crime. The Governor's proposal
also imposes significant penalties upon the individuals who operate
these laboratories as well as those who assist the operators by, among
other things, knowingly procuring, transporting or storing the
substances or equipment needed to operate the laboratories.
While I will focus today on the Department's role, I want to
emphasize the importance of all the involved agencies, working
together, to combat this growing public health and safety threat. Our
State agencies have worked collaboratively to address many issues
surrounding the illegal manufacturing of methamphetamine. It has become
apparent that the problems associated with methamphetamine production,
distribution and use, are very broad and are relevant to several State
agencies. As such, a number of these agencies have started to
coordinate and work toward a statewide strategy to deal with these
issues. Part of this effort will be to continue to look at deficiencies
in State law and develop proposals to deal with these issues.
Operated in secret, clan labs are used to produce chemical or
biological agents, explosives, drugs or other hazardous substances. The
most commonly occurring clan labs are used to produce the drug
methamphetamine. In New York State, these labs are most frequently
located in rural and semi-rural areas. According to the New York State
Police, between 1989 and 1999, there were only four methamphetamine
laboratories found in New York State. Since then, the number of labs
has risen quickly and steadily, from eight in 2000 to 19 in 2001, 45 in
2002, and 73 in 2003. The rate at which these labs are proliferating is
similar to what began occurring in the Midwest during the mid to late
1990s.
There are about 150 different ways to manufacture methamphetamine.
Recipes are readily available, including on the Internet, and so are
the ingredients. In New York State, the two most common manufacturing
methods are known as the ``Birch'' method and the ``Red Phosphorus'' or
``Red P'' method. The former is found mostly in western New York State
and some basic ingredients are pseudoephedrine/ephedrine, anhydrous
ammonia, lithium, ether, water and hydrochloric acid. The latter
method, found mostly in central and northeastern New York State,
utilizes, in addition to pseudoephedrine/ephedrine and hydrochloric
acid, hydriodic acid, iodine, red phosphorous from matchbook striker
plate or road flares, and lye.
To date, fewer clan labs have been identified in New York State
than in many other areas of the country, and those that have been found
occur mostly in areas near the Pennsylvania or Canadian borders. The
slow growth of clan labs in the state likely stems from the state's ban
of the sale of dietary supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids in
1996. Similar federal legislation only took effect in April 2004.
Without available sources of ephedrine alkaloids in New York State,
clan labs have been forced to use products containing pseudoephedrines,
such as over-the-counter decongestants, which are time-consuming to
distill into illegal methamphetamine drugs. Nevertheless,
methamphetamine use has begun to grow in New York State--particularly
New York City.
The New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse reports
an increasing trend in methamphetamine treatment admissions in New York
State. There were approximately 500 admissions in 1996 with an increase
to almost 1,150 in 2003. Significantly, much of this increase is
attributable to clients whose primary substance abuse involves
methamphetamine. The primary route of administration by users is oral,
followed by smoking, inhalation and injection, respectively.
The Department's Environmental Conservation Officers (ECOs), made
up of both uniformed police officers and plainclothes investigators,
work with other federal, State and local law enforcement agencies in
investigating these clan labs. The criminal investigations on which the
ECOs focus involve the threat to human health and the environment,
particularly the illegal disposal of hazardous waste, and toxic
substances which may have been released into the environment.
Violations of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law by clan
labs include misdemeanor and felony pollution charges.
The Department's environmental remediation staff includes
responders with expertise in the identification and clean up of
contaminated sites, including those at which the volatile chemicals
used in the manufacture of methamphetamine are found. In conjunction
with the efforts of the ECOs, remediation staff attempt to locate where
chemicals from the clan lab have been disposed, perform an initial
identification of those chemicals found, and coordinate the removal of
chemicals that are an immediate threat to public health, safety and the
environment. Given the volatile nature of the chemicals used to
manufacture methamphetamine, these activities are hazardous, and
require specialized training to ensure staff safety.
Environmental concerns at clan labs are extensive. A variety of
ignitable, corrosive, toxic or reactive wastes can result from the
manufacture of methamphetamine. Red phosphorous, lithium, and many
other chemicals used during production of methamphetamine are also
highly flammable or combustible. The improper handling or storage of
these items by methamphetamine users and producers increases the
potential for fires and explosions. Furthermore, these chemicals may
migrate into drinking wells; be drained into septic systems; or be
dumped off-site. It is estimated that for each pound of methamphetamine
produced, four to six pounds of toxic waste are generated.
``Cookers,'' the people involved in making methamphetamine, may not
know or care about the dangers of the substances which they are using.
Labs, which can be located anywhere, from apartments and motel rooms to
motor vehicles, can explode, endangering the lives of anyone in the
lab, as well as those who may reside nearby. This can pose a
particularly dangerous threat to children living in or near these labs.
To ensure the safety of both law enforcement and remediation staff who
must deal with these dangerous sites, and to facilitate evidence
gathering, the Department believes guidance should be developed to
ensure the effective use of resources and provide uniformity in
responding to clan labs in New York State.
One of the substances of greatest concern in the manufacture of
methamphetamine is anhydrous ammonia. This liquid, which is used on
farms to fertilize crops, is both toxic and corrosive, and expands to
800 times its original volume when exposed to ambient air.
Methamphetamine manufacturers have been known to steal quantities of
anhydrous ammonia from storage tanks on farms in rural areas.
Frequently, they leave the anhydrous ammonia storage tank open,
allowing the anhydrous ammonia to empty out of the tank. As a gas,
anhydrous ammonia reacts with moisture to form ammonium hydroxide, a
corrosive substance that is irritating to the eyes, nose, throat,
lungs, mucous membranes and skin. It can cause dizziness, chemical
burns, and can seriously affect the central nervous system, even
causing death. Exposure to ammonia vapors may result in pulmonary
edema. Anyone who happens to come near such a tank as it is emptying is
in danger. For the same reason, law enforcement personnel stopping a
suspect after an anhydrous ammonia theft might be in danger. Of course,
there is also a potential for adverse environmental impact from
groundwater contamination. In addition, such thefts can place a
significant financial hardship on the farmers from whom the anhydrous
ammonia was stolen.
Environmental contamination may include indoor environments as well
as outdoor environments such as soil, water supplies, septic systems
and air. Indoor environments may become contaminated when the chemicals
and fumes formed during methamphetamine production penetrate or adhere
to porous surfaces such as upholstery, drapes, linens, carpeting, and
sheet rock. Other surfaces (e.g., furniture, counter tops, floors) can
be contaminated by spills or emissions of chemicals during drug
manufacture. The residues in these indoor environments can continually
expose individuals until the contaminated surfaces are properly cleaned
or the contaminated materials removed. Again, this type of environment
can be a particularly dangerous setting for children living in or near
these labs.
As a result of these concerns related to anhydrous ammonia, in
August 2004, Governor Pataki signed legislation (Chapter 357, Laws of
2004) requiring the Department to conduct a study on whether or not it
would be feasible to introduce an additive into anhydrous ammonia that
would prevent it from being used to manufacture methamphetamine. The
statute takes effect on April 1, 2005, providing the Department with
time to work with the New York State Departments of Health, Agriculture
and Markets, and the New York State Police to study and make
recommendations on this important issue. The statute requires the
Department to issue a report containing such recommendations by April
1, 2006.
As I previously mentioned, our State agencies have worked
collaboratively to address many issues surrounding the illegal
manufacturing of methamphetamine and we will continue this effort.
On behalf of Acting Commissioner Sheehan, I want to thank you for
allowing the Department to submit its comments on the activities which
we currently undertake to investigate and remediate clan labs. We look
forward to working with the Committee on strategies to address this
growing threat to the State's public health and environmental quality.
Biography for Henry L. Hamilton
Henry Hamilton is Assistant Commissioner for Public Protection with
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. As
Assistant Commissioner, he oversees the Department's Law Enforcement
Division (consisting of 300 uniformed and plainclothes police
officers), as well as the Forest Protection and Fire Management
Division, Emergency Preparedness Office, and the Office of
Environmental Monitors. Mr. Hamilton joined the Department in 1999. He
had previously been with the New York State Attorney General's Office
for 18 years, including nine years as Director of Investigations. Mr.
Hamilton retired from the Army Reserve in 1999 after a 24-year career,
active and reserve, with the U.S. Army Military Police. He obtained his
Bachelor's degree in Criminology from Syracuse University, and his
Master's degree in Criminal Justice from the University of Alabama. He
is also a graduate of the U.S. Army Command & General Staff College.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Mr. Hamilton. Thank
you very much for your work.
Sheriff Howard, it is a pleasure to welcome you here.
STATEMENT OF MR. GARY W. HOWARD, SHERIFF OF TIOGA COUNTY, NEW
YORK
Mr. Howard. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, my
name is Gary Howard. I am the Sheriff of Tioga County situated
in the southern tier of New York. I want to thank you for the
opportunity to come here today and discuss my experiences with
the threats posed by methamphetamine production.
The explosive growth of clandestine methamphetamine labs
over the last few years has presented a serious problem for law
enforcement and local governments. Methamphetamine production
activities within New York State have increased significantly
over the last five years. Between 1989 and 1999, there were
only four labs reported in New York State. Last year--or in the
year 2003, the Tioga County Sheriff's Department had 28.
Exposure to the hazardous chemicals, the possibility of
explosion, fire, and violent behavior are all common dangers
associated with the production of methamphetamine. Meth users
are oftentimes paranoid and agitated, always thinking everyone
is out to get them. This behavior leads them to use
surveillance cameras and motion detectors as well as arming
themselves to defend their operations. In 2003, October, a
Tioga County man was shot to death over an argument of
anhydrous ammonia. During that incident, there were seven
people involved. Every one of them was armed with a firearm at
the time of this shooting.
According to the New York State Department of Health,
approximately 47 percent of all meth labs are found at
residential properties. The operators of these labs are often
neglectful in providing the basic needs of their family and
normally live in substandard conditions. Many children live
hand-in-hand with chemicals or toxic substance that are used in
the production of meth. We have debriefed children from meth
labs and have been told stories that they had to wear masks
while mommy and daddy are in the kitchen ``making stuff.'' One
incident found a wife and a daughter sleeping while her husband
was making meth in the kitchen. He mishandled some chemicals
and a flash fire erupted, burning the house down. He resulted
in getting second-degree burns, and we took his lab down.
Equipment, such as hypodermic needles, containers of
anhydrous ammonia solvents, and ether are found in kitchens,
bedrooms, and bathrooms of the homes. In rural areas, garbage
from the process is often taken outside and disposed of. During
a recent raid, deputies found a defendant dumping ether down a
toilet trying to destroy evidence. At another raid, law
enforcement personnel found four defendants in the middle of a
cooking process. The fifth occupant of the residence was an 11-
year-old boy who was wheelchair bound with cerebral palsy. This
child had numerous exposures to the meth process, and
subsequently was turned over to the Department of Social
Services.
Meth cooking produces solid and liquid waste that can
contaminate a building. It is not only possible but likely that
residual contaminants are left on surfaces and absorbent
materials, such as carpets, furniture, sinks, drains, and in
the ventilation and drain systems. Solid waste product,
referred to as ``sludge,'' which is the leftover remnants of
the process, is routinely dumped down the sinks, drains, and
toilets or discarded outside along roads or in somebody's yard.
In preparation for taking down a suspected meth lab, local
law enforcement will spend hundreds of hours in surveillance,
background, and undercover work. Briefings of law enforcement,
emergency medical service people, HAZMAT people, and fire
departments take place to ensure the safety of all involved.
The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) and the
Public Employee Safety & Health Bureau (PESH) regulated safety
gear must be obtained and used, and in most cases, we used the
New York State Police county HAZMAT team for the collection of
evidence.
To further complicate this problem in the growing trend of
meth is what are known as ``box labs.'' These labs are--all of
the equipment that is used to produce methamphetamine is put
into a container, put into a trunk of a car, and in one night
is used in one residence and then moved to another residence
the following night where meth is made. We are running into
these occasionally on the road.
The creation of H.R. 798 will extend help to local
governments in the fight against this problem. The
environmental impact of the production of meth may not be known
for years to come. And the residual effects of the leftover
chemicals pose a hazard to homeowners and tenants where labs
were once located. Having standards and guidelines as outlined
will help establish a protocol that in the future will help
clean up meth sites and protect the public.
And I want to thank you for inviting me down here, Mr.
Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Howard follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gary W. Howard
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is Gary W.
Howard; I am the Sheriff of Tioga County, located in the southern tier
of New York. I want to thank you for this opportunity to appear today
to discuss my experiences with the threats posed by methamphetamine
production.
The Tioga County Sheriff's Office has the largest law enforcement
presence within the county and operates a 102-bed correctional facility
with 49 corrections officers and 32 law enforcement officers. There are
five criminal investigators who investigate reported felony crimes to
include all drug activity within Tioga County.
The explosive growth of clandestine methamphetamine labs over the
last couple of years presents a serious problem for law enforcement and
local government, and if left unchecked, has the potential to present
far reaching problems for the future.
Methamphetamine production activities within New York State have
increased significantly over the last five years. Between 1989 and
1999, there were four incidents reported for the entire State of New
York. Since then, the incidence of these labs in New York State has
risen annually, and totals 193. Eight in 2000; 19 in 2001; 45 in 2002
and 73 in 2003. Of these 193 labs, 28 were located in Tioga County and
25 in bordering Chemung County. The close proximity to Pennsylvania
provides indicators for the number of labs found in New York. In 2003,
16 of the 58 labs found in Pennsylvania were in Bradford County, which
boarders both Tioga and Chemung counties.
Methamphetamine labs present serious dangers to law enforcement,
EMS personnel and other service providers, as well as the public at
large. Exposure to hazardous chemicals, the possibility of explosion,
fire and violent behavior are all common dangers associated with the
production of methamphetamine. Meth users are often times paranoid and
agitated, always thinking that everyone is ``out to get them.'' This
behavior leads them to utilize cameras and motion sensors, as well as
arming themselves to defend their operation. A grave reminder of the
fact that firearms and violence are common with these labs, occurred
during two separate incidents, within one year of the other. In the
fall of October 2003, a Tioga County man was shot to death over an
argument about anhydrous ammonia. Seven people involved in this
incident, admitted to being armed with a firearm at the time of the
shooting. In March 2004, two Bradford County, Pennsylvania Deputies
were shot to death while trying to serve an arrest warrant for an
individual wanted for methamphetamine production.
Along with the inherent dangers presented by the suspects
themselves, law enforcement personnel, service providers, and the
public who live near or have reason to visit these labs face unseen
hazardous chemicals, toxic waste and residue created during the meth
cooking process. According to the New York State Department of Health,
approximately 47 percent of meth labs were found in residential
properties. The operators of these labs are often neglectful in
providing for the basic needs of their family, and normally live in
substandard conditions.
Many of the labs that are found are being conducted right in the
kitchen or basement of the home. Chemicals such as Muriatic Acid,
Acetone, solvents, and ether have been found in the kitchens, bedrooms
and living rooms of the defendants.
Children of meth users have told stories of wearing masks while
Daddy and Mommy ``make stuff'' in the kitchen. Children have been found
sleeping in bed or on couches while their parents make meth in another
part of the house.
One incident found that a wife and daughter were sleeping while her
husband was making meth in the kitchen, during the process he
mishandled one of the chemicals and a flash fire erupted, causing
considerable damage to the residence and resulting in second degree
burns to the husband.
Equipment such as hypodermic needles, containers of anhydrous
ammonia, solvents, and ether and are found kitchens, bedrooms and
bathrooms of the homes. In rural areas garbage from the process is
often taken outside into the yard and burn in piles to in an effort to
destroy any of the evidence.
During a recent raid, Deputies found a defendant dumping ether down
the toilet trying to destroy evidence, while others ran from the
residence trying to avoid police, leaving their children behind.
Many children live hand-in-hand with chemicals or toxic substances
that are used in the production of meth. These chemicals are known to
cause serious physical injuries.
Short-term, high concentration exposure to some of these chemicals
can cause severe health problems including lung damage and burns.
At another raid, law enforcement personnel found four defendants in
the middle of the cooking process. Another occupant of the residence
was an 11-year-old boy who was wheelchair bound with cerebral palsy.
This child had numerous exposures to the production of meth.
Subsequently, the boy was turned over to the Department of Social
Services.
Every meth ``recipe'' starts with over-the-counter medications that
include pseudoephedrine or ephedrine in their contents. The pills are
crushed and mixed with other chemicals in the process of cooking meth.
Most of the chemicals associated with producing meth can be grouped
into three categories: Solvents; Metals and Salts; and Strong acids or
Bases. Chemicals such as Starter Fluid; Muriatic Acid; Drain Cleaners;
Lithium batteries; Iodine, and Acetone to name a few, are commonly
found in varying quantities.
The cooking process causes chemicals and methamphetamine to be
deposited on surfaces and household belongings. Production also
releases toxic gasses, including, but not limited to, hydrochloric
acid, hydrogen chloride, phosphine, and ammonia. These gasses are
released during the cooking process and can be deadly.
Meth cooking produces solid and liquid wastes that can contaminate
a building. It is not only possible, but likely that residual
contaminates are left on surfaces and in absorbent materials, such as
carpets, furniture, sinks, drains and ventilation systems. The solid
waste product, referred to as ``sludge'' and other remnants of the
cooking process are routinely dumped down sinks, drains and toilets, or
discarded outside along roads or in yards, left to leach into the soil
and ground water, leaving behind a virtual toxic dump of chemicals.
Exposure to these meth lab chemicals and waste products can result
in minor or serious life threatening medical problems, depending on the
circumstances of the exposure.
The eradication of clandestine labs exacts a serious burden on
local law enforcement and government budgets and resources. In
preparation for taking down a suspected meth lab, local law enforcement
must spend hundreds of man-hours in surveillance, background and
undercover work. Briefings of law enforcement, EMS, and HAZMAT
personnel must take place to insure the safety of all involved. OSHA
and PESH required safety gear must be obtained and deployed, requiring
expensive equipment and extensive training.
Beginning in 1999 when the first lab of this type was found in
Tioga County, investigators began to educate themselves on the problem
that now exists. Researching law enforcement publications and speaking
with agencies outside our area. This was only a step into the education
that was to follow. Credited schools, forums and local training on meth
labs followed to help in getting a grasp of what the problem was.
Today the Sheriff's Office has one investigator that is devoted
full-time to the investigations of meth labs with two others educating
the public, holding classes for groups such as Department of Social
Services, Mental and Public Health, and numerous other clubs and
organizations. This of course puts a strain on manpower and limits the
amount of time that can be devoted to other criminal activity.
In some cases, Tioga County has enlisted the help of the DEA in
clearing the lab site of chemicals and contaminates. Unfortunately, the
DEA only has two fully trained clandestine lab teams to cover New York,
making it extremely difficult to acquire their assistance. In most
cases, Tioga County enlists the assistance of the New York State Police
and county HAZMAT team to perform an initial assessment of the lab site
and perform evidence collection and removal of lab related debris, such
as chemicals and containers. Further cleanup operations and expenses
usually fall on the plate of local government, at substantial expense.
To further complicate the problem is the growing trend of mobile
meth labs. Known as ``box labs,'' producers carry their cooking
operations in luggage size containers, which allow them to cook their
meth in cars, motel rooms, or in isolated, wooded areas in an effort to
avoid detection. This methodology creates a greater opportunity for
producers to dump the ``sludge'' and toxic waste in areas which would
increase the changes of exposure, or environmental contamination.
Clandestine methamphetamine labs present unique and very serious
problems for both law enforcement and public health officials. Unlike
other illicit drug activity, the impact of this drug can be far
reaching, having negative effects on those who produce it or use it, to
those who are unknowingly exposed to a contaminated residence,
waterway, or debris. It has a negative impact on the financial
resources of public safety and public health agencies, and will
certainly have a negative impact on the environment.
The creation of H.R. 798 will extend help to local governments in
the fight against the manufacture and cleanup of meth. The environment
impact of the production of meth may not be known for years to come.
The residual effects of the leftover chemicals pose a hazard to home
owners and tenants were labs were once located. Having standards and
guidelines as outlined, will help establish a protocol that in the
future will help in the cleanup of known meth sites and protect the
public.
Biography for Gary W. Howard
PERSONAL
Born and raised in Binghamton, NY; Age: 50; Married with two
children and two grandchildren; 1972 Graduate of Binghamton High School
MILITARY
Served in the U.S. Army from 9/73 through 11/76
Served as a Military Police Officer with the 287th MP
Company, Berlin, German (Check Point Charlie)
Received an Honorable Discharge in 1976
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Elected Sheriff of Tioga County in 1/04
126 employees
Law Enforcement
Correctional Facility
E-911 Center
$5 Million Budget
Promoted to Senior Investigator in 8/94
Promoted to Criminal Investigator--3/85 to 8/94
Promoted to Road Patrol Sergeant--1982 to 3/85
Promoted to Road Patrol Officer--1980 to 1982
Hired as a Corrections Officer from 9/77 to 1/80.
PROFESSIONAL TRAINING
National Law Enforcement Institute School for Advanced Investigations
U.S. Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration--Drug
Enforcement School
NYS Division of Criminal Justice Services--Course in Supervisory Level
Drug Enforcement
``Col. Henry F. Williams'' Homicide Course
U.S. Army Military Police School
NYS Municipal Police Training Council, Instructors School
FBI Anti-Sniper and Survival Training Course
FBI Advanced Latent Fingerprint Techniques Course
NYS Bureau of Municipal Police--Basic Police School
NYS Bureau of Municipal Police--Course in Police Supervision
NYS Bureau of Municipal Police--Criminal Investigations Course
University of Delaware course in Contemporary Homicide investigations
NYS Fire Academy--Cause and Origin Determination Course
NYS Commission of Corrections--Basic Corrections Officers School
National Underwater Instructors Association--SCUBA and Skin Diving
School
ADDITIONAL TRAINING & SEMINAR/CONFERENCES
Professional Conferences Attended:
National Sheriff's Institute--Executive Level Management
NYS Sheriff's Association Road Patrol and Investigative Leaders
Conference
NYS Public Agency Training Council Conference
Conference on Accountability-Commitment--A New Model for Police
Management
Leadership Tioga Program
NOTABLE ASSIGNMENTS & POSITIONS
NYS Homeland Security Office ``Point of Contact'' for Tioga County
Certified Police Instructor
Past-President of the Tioga County Law Enforcement Association
Past Member of the Tioga County HazMat Team
Past Member of the Tioga County Fire Investigation Team
Chairman Boehlert. How is that for an expert witness? One
second remaining in his time. Thank you very much.
Dr. Bell.
STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT R. BELL, PH.D., PRESIDENT, TENNESSEE
TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Dr. Bell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member
Gordon.
Mr. Chairman, I have a prepared statement, which I would
request be entered into the record.
Chairman Boehlert. Without objection, so ordered.
All full statements are entered into the record for the
benefit of our colleagues, who are not here. Incidentally, this
is quite good attendance, because of the interest in the
subject.
Dr. Bell. Thank you.
Good morning, Members of the Committee, and especially
Congressman Davis, who is an alumnus of Tennessee Tech
University. It is an honor to be invited to testify before you
today regarding H.R. 798. My name is Bob Bell, and I serve as
President of Tennessee Technological University, the state's
only technological university, which is known for a strong
reputation in engineering and sciences.
The area Tennessee Tech serves in our state is
predominately rural and has been dramatically impacted by the
meth problem. While the leadership of Tennessee has been deeply
involved in trying to solve this problem, we need the focus
this committee provides on a national level. It is reassuring
that you understand how explosive this problem is and how much
this is a threat to our way of life. We are particularly
fortunate in Cookeville, in our area, to be represented by
Congressman Gordon, who has made the fight against meth a top
priority for his public service.
Numbers do not fully illustrate the extent of the problem,
particularly in rural Tennessee. They do not describe the human
element. But here are just some of the facts associated with
this challenge. The labs that are used to make meth are often
portable and clandestine, as you have heard, so they can be
easily created and hidden in rural areas. Labs are found
virtually every day within many counties in the State of
Tennessee. A full 75 percent of the meth labs seized in the
southeast are in Tennessee. In 2004, there were 1,259 lab
incidents in Tennessee, the third highest in the Nation. The
Cumberland Plateau Tennessee Tech serves is now recognized as
the richest source of meth in the state. Last year, more than
700 children were taken into State custody because of meth
arrests amounting to a cost of over $4 million to the state.
Last year, the Tennessee Governor established a task force
on meth abuse. 1/5 of the members were Tennessee Tech alumni.
As a result of that group's finding, he has presented a
comprehensive bill addressing this issue. Among the
recommendations are limitations on the sale of cold and sinus
products containing pseudoephedrine. That measure alone
previously enacted in our home community of Cookeville,
Tennessee, has already slowed the manufacture of meth, although
it can not address the importation of the drug.
Our region has also benefited from the efforts of
Representatives Gordon and Davis who assist local meth
investigations and who started a public education campaign with
federal grants.
H.R. 798 provides authorization for new research and
studies to be funded by federal agencies, such as EPA and NIST.
In our view, universities, such as Tennessee Tech, have an
important role to play in supporting and carrying out that
research. In the time since the meth problem became apparent in
Tennessee, our faculty members have been eager to join the
battle in a meaningful way. Research and service conducted so
far include the following.
Using street methods, Tennessee Tech chemistry faculty
members have demonstrated that pseudoephedrine can be extracted
from most combination products, such as cold medicines that
combine the substance with other drugs, with a 50 to 70 percent
extraction ratio. To aid law enforcement and free warrant
environments, chemistry professors have also conducted
preliminary research on quick detection kits that were
mentioned earlier. A Tennessee Tech professor is also gathering
psychological data on children who have been removed from homes
where meth was abused or cooked to test whether exposure to
meth can be linked to cognitive problems.
In Tennessee Tech's College of Business Administration, a
meth education tool kit has been developed with video
interviews featuring dozens of front-line meth specialists.
This CD will be distributed to law enforcement and emergency
service personnel, schools, property owners, and others free of
charge.
Much more can be done, though, and we suggest the following
as potential research areas.
In manufacturing process research, continue the work to
demonstrate extraction efficiencies. We propose that cooking
individual components needs to be done to better understand the
product and the byproducts associated with this process, and we
need to examine the methods for chemical bonding that do not
allow product decomposition.
In the chemistry of detection, we propose new standards at
the national level for detection by researching the external
environment where vapors are vented and outside the home in a
car or other facility being used as a mobile lab.
A quick detection kit will help generate turnaround times
less than one day on crime scene data simplifying the issuance
of warrants. Long-term research should focus on mechanisms that
quickly detect the presence of hazardous chemicals in a rental
home, a motel room, a college residence hall much the same way
that a smoke alarm detects the potential for fire.
A technique called ``lab fingerprinting,'' the system of
distinguishing among individual lots or batches of meth would
allow law enforcement to tie a crime scene involving meth abuse
to the original manufacturer of the drug. No two batches of
meth are identical, thus, they can be viewed with the same
integrity as a human fingerprint with the right research.
In remediation, we need to address more efficient methods
for identifying and containing lab products and byproducts with
a rapid environmental kit. We simply don't know how clean is
clean.
Combining biology and psychology. We must better understand
the physical and behavioral effects of a lab environment on
victims of meth, particularly children, in order to devise more
appropriate methods of faster, more complete rehabilitation.
In education and science, we can expedite the spread of
curricular initiatives and research findings in online
clearinghouses addressing a glaring need for a more central
source of information.
Mr. Chairman, it is not a university's place to go out into
the streets to arrest criminals or to remove children from
their homes when the environment is unsafe or to treat the
addiction. It is a university's place to train the
professionals who take on difficult jobs on the front line of
this battle. It is a university's place to conduct the research
that can provide the tools that these professionals need.
The legislation that is the subject of today's hearing
takes the next logical steps in one of the most perplexing
elements of the meth problem: detection and clean up of lab
sites.
I applaud the Committee's leadership in creating this bill
and urge its prompt adoption, and I thank you for your time and
for this opportunity to take part in this hearing. I will be
pleased to answer questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Bell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert R. Bell
INTRODUCTION
Tennessee Tech is the state's only technological university, with a
strong reputation in engineering and the sciences. A comprehensive
university serving over 9,000 students, TTU retains a strong commitment
to excellence in undergraduate education, with majors in engineering,
business administration, education, the arts and sciences, nursing,
agriculture, and human ecology. We also offer a wide range of graduate
programs, including doctoral degrees in many fields of engineering,
environmental sciences, and ``exceptional learning'' in education. TTU
hosts three accomplished state Centers of Excellence in Energy Systems
Research, Water Quality, and Manufacturing Research. Last year,
Tennessee Tech was listed by U.S. News and World Report as one of only
11 mid-sized universities in the ``Best in the South'' category and in
the top tier of the ``Best Public and Private Colleges and
Universities'' in the South. TTU is a member of the American
Association of State Colleges and Universities.
While TTU is a public university serving students from all over our
state, many other states, and many foreign nations, we retain a special
mission-based commitment to serve the Upper Cumberland Region of
Tennessee. The Upper Cumberland Region, containing roughly 40 counties,
ranges from just East of Nashville to just West of Knoxville, and from
the Kentucky border to just north of Chattanooga. The region TTU serves
is predominantly rural and has been dramatically impacted by the meth
problem.
SIGNIFICANCE OF PROBLEM/RISE IN THE NUMBER OF USERS AND LABS
Meth was first introduced as an illicit drug in Tennessee in 1978.
A Tennessee native, who had been imprisoned in California, brought the
knowledge and production methods back to his home after he was
released. Unfortunately, he also set up a ``school'' to teach
individuals how to ``cook'' meth for a fee.
District Attorney General Bill Gibson, a TTU alumnus, reported that
the Upper Cumberland Region began seeing the impact of meth in the
early 1990s with several violent incidents that were difficult to
explain. The consensus of the medical community and law enforcement is
that meth is the most addictive and dangerous drug seen in the Upper
Cumberland area.
A homemade poisonous cousin of pharmaceutically based amphetamine
or speed, meth has long been the dominant drug problem in California.
It is an evil blend of common household and farming products including
anhydrous ammonia, acetone, antifreeze, and the active ingredients in
some cold medicines, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine. It has one of the
highest addiction rates of all illegal drugs, including crack cocaine,
and one of the lowest recovery rates, about five percent.
Until the past decade, meth was a distant problem. It ravaged
Pacific and Northwestern states for a long time and more recently
infected the Midwest. After moving into Middle Tennessee, in the past
10 years in particular, it has flourished in small labs in rural
communities where detection is difficult. Today, according to the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Agency, a full 75 percent of all methamphetamine labs
seized in the Southeast are in Tennessee, growing from 135 labs in 1999
to 499 labs in 2003. Last year, according to National Clandestine
Laboratory Database numbers, there were 1,259 lab incidents in
Tennessee, third highest in the Nation. The National Drug Intelligence
Center considers the Cumberland Plateau the richest source of
methamphetamine in the state.
Meth presents a unique danger to regions like Middle Tennessee. The
laboratories used to make the drug are often portable and/or
clandestine, so they are easily created. According to the Tennessee
Governor's Task Force on Methamphetamine Abuse, labs are found
virtually every day within every county in Tennessee. That makes this
deadly drug as available in the farthest reaches of rural America as it
is in the big city streets.
Geographically, Tennessee is unique because it is bordered by eight
other states. The interstate and State highway systems crisscross
Tennessee's four major cities and traverse each of its borders. These
highways, according to the Koch Crime Institute, carry a very large
volume of traffic and are a primary means of moving drugs to and
through Tennessee. As a result, the drug situations in the neighboring
states have an impact on the drug situation in Tennessee.
The availability and demand for meth continues to increase
throughout Tennessee. While much of the meth consumed in the state is
transported from Mexico and the Southwest border area, clandestine meth
labs can be found everywhere in Tennessee and are encountered daily by
law enforcement. These facts are a stark contrast to the problem of a
few years ago. The labs discovered in Tennessee are generally
characterized as small and unsophisticated. These clandestine meth labs
pose a significant threat because lab operators are frequently armed
and substantially involved in the drug's distribution.
Dozens of TTU alumni, as well as faculty members, are on the front
lines in the battle against this deadly drug. They are professionals in
law enforcement, the judicial system, social and medical services,
state government and education. In the past two years, these men and
women have rallied in a concerted effort to wipe out the worst drug
threat to ever face our region.
PROBLEM SCOPE: HOW IT HAS AFFECTED TENNESSEE AND THE UPPER CUMBERLAND
Currently, Tennessee is third in the Nation in meth lab-related
incidents. Meth lab arrests have more than tripled since 1999. It is
estimated that more than 700 children will be taken into State custody
in 2005, at a cost of over $4 million to the state. The production
process leaves behind five pounds of toxic waste product for every one
pound of meth. Removal and handling of evidence and hazardous residue
can cost between $5,000 and $20,000 per site, according to the 13th
Judicial District Drug Task Force. Restoration of the site to safe,
habitable conditions can cost additional tens of thousands of dollars.
Businesses suffer from escalated costs of health coverage, lost time at
work, workplace injuries, and theft. And the meth users and their
families suffer dramatic, even life-threatening health problems
associated with this substance abuse.
Dr. Sullivan Smith, the county medical examiner and another TTU
alumnus, described meth as the most dangerous drug he has dealt with in
his career and claims it is responsible for the majority of violent
crime in Cookeville in the past three or four years. Dr. Smith, who is
DEA-certified to enter and seize a meth lab, expresses concern for the
children meth affects. These labs, besides being toxic, are places
where children are growing up in the midst of violence, weapons, and
prostitution.
Meth also has a profound effect on our school systems. Johnny
Cordell, Upper Cumberland Representative to the Tennessee Organization
of School Superintendents, noted that in his county (Sequatchie County,
population approximately 13,000), law enforcement locates and destroys
one meth lab each week. Mike Prock, Chairperson of the Upper Cumberland
School Directors' Study Council, emphasized how unrealistic it is to
expect children to come to school ready to learn when their family unit
is being destroyed by meth addiction. Lana Sievers, Commissioner of the
Tennessee Department of Education, noted that meth is not an isolated
problem. Almost 10 percent of Tennessee students in the K-12 system
report having tried meth. This drug is being used and produced in their
homes, and it is making its way into the schools.
In addition to the impact on school systems, meth abuse has
terrible consequences for family members, especially young children.
Children taken from active clandestine meth labs are stripped of all
possessions. They are normally taken to an emergency room at a
hospital, where they are tested, frequently by needle. They are
separated from adult family members, sometimes from other siblings, and
cannot even keep a favorite teddy bear for comfort. TTU alumnus and
child protective services case manager Betsy Dunn considers meth the
worst form of child endangerment she has ever seen. Children are
neglected to the point where they are often the primary caretakers of
their siblings and their parents as well.
Meth also has profound effects on State and local governments and
support resources. Often, smaller counties in Tennessee simply do not
have the resources to address the meth problem and must call for
outside assistance. In a typical raid on a clandestine meth lab in a
rural county where an arrest is made, at least four officers are
needed. Current guidelines stipulate that a ``partner'' system must be
used, with a minimum of two officers in the residence/lab, one as a
lead and one as a backup. Because of time constraints associated with
potential exposures to the toxic environment, regulations also
stipulate that a ``rotation'' team of two additional officers be
outside the residence, ready to rescue those inside and ready to rotate
after the first team reaches a specified time limit in the facility.
Emergency personnel and/or fire personnel are also required on scene in
case of an accident. A typical cleanup operation may take from eight to
15 hours. During this time, local county resources are stretched to a
breaking point, and County Sheriffs often must call for support from
other agencies. County medical providers and facilities are also often
overwhelmed by spillovers from clandestine laboratory raids.
AGENCIES THAT CURRENTLY RESPOND TO RESIDENTIAL METH LABS/HOW LABS ARE
CURRENTLY ASSESSED, CLEANED AND REMEDIATED/STATE
LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT GUIDE THIS PROCESS
Local law enforcement agencies are often the first notified about a
suspected clandestine meth lab. Typically, when a lab is identified, a
team of responders is assembled. First on the scene may be local law
enforcement agencies (city police, County Sheriff's office). Only
individuals who are ``Clandestine Lab Certified'' may enter the
residence or clandestine lab. They may be supplemented by agents from
the Drug Task Force, Drug Enforcement Agency, or the Tennessee Bureau
of Investigation. Emergency medical services personnel are also called
for stand-by support. Often, other support is provided by local fire
department personnel, the Tennessee Department of Children's Services,
and other service providers such as the Upper Cumberland Community
Services Agency. Certified hazardous materials contractors are used to
gather, transport, and dispose of materials in the meth lab. The Office
of the District Attorney and, frequently, the Public Defender's Office
are also closely involved. As the site is catalogued and remediation is
initiated, officials from the regional public health offices and
environmental protection offices are also often involved.
Protocols that guide assessment and remediation of clandestine
methamphetamine labs are found in Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68,
as amended by Public Acts 2004, Chapter 855, ``Inspection, Testing, and
Quarantine of Property Where Methamphetamine was Manufactured,'' and by
``Emergency Rules of the Department of Environment and Conservation-
Standards for Testing and Cleaning Clandestine Drug Manufacturing
Sites'' (Chapter 1200, 1-19). Also appropriate is Tennessee Department
of Environment and Conservation Interim Guidance, February 22, 2005,
``Reasonable, Appropriate, Protective Cleanup Responses and
Documentation Guidance for Properties Quarantined due to Clandestine
Methamphetamine Laboratory (CML) Activities Pursuant to TCA 68-212 Part
5.''
LIMITATIONS OF ASSESSMENT/REMEDIATION STRATEGIES
While current assessment/remediation strategies are clearly more
refined than those in place just a few years ago, much remains to be
done. Entrance guidelines are still loose. Individuals entering a
clandestine meth lab are in effect entering a working hazardous
materials/chemistry laboratory, but one where few traditional safety
measures have been in place. There are no fume hoods or air circulation
mechanisms. There has been no routine cleanup protocol in place for
spills. While the presence of meth is presumed, uncertainty remains
about the levels and types of other hazardous gases, fluids, and solids
in the lab environment. Science related to byproducts and the toxicity
of the environment is still unclear.
Unfortunately, a baseline definition of what ``clean'' is, in terms
of remediating labs, is not available. Research at the university level
is needed to develop that definition. Fundamental research describing
what ``clean'' really is must happen now.
A great deal of work remains to be done on the effects of exposure
to the clandestine laboratory in children, both from a medical and a
psycho-social context. Research and work must be done to develop more
effective treatment/rehabilitation programs for meth users. Little
evidence exists today on the success of programs specifically
addressing the impacts of meth on the body and brain, and what evidence
does exist gives little hope of remediation with current treatments.
House Bill 798 will help take major steps in the right direction toward
this effort. Universities can play a major role as strategic partners
in developing new detection and remediation strategies, helping develop
standard reference materials and validation protocols. Higher education
can also play a role in identifying adverse biological risks on the
intervention teams, as well as studying the biological/medical and
psycho-social effects on children and others in the clandestine meth
labs.
COLLABORATIONS WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY
Tennessee Tech has collaborated with a number of state and regional
agencies for some time. Working with the Office of the Governor and the
13th Judicial District Drug Task Force, TTU faculty and staff
participated in a wide range of activities addressing the meth problem;
the university has been identified by the Drug Task Force as a
``central resource'' for the region.
TTU units involved in these efforts include the Department of
Chemistry; Center for Structural Chemistry; the Center for Management,
Utilization, and Protection of Water Resources; the doctoral program in
environmental sciences; the Business Media Center; and the College of
Education. Key individuals involved include Dr. Scott Northrup, Chair,
Department of Chemistry; Dr. Jeff Boles, Director, Environmental
Sciences Ph.D. program; Dr. Eugene Kline, Professor of Chemistry; Dr.
Martha Wells, Water Center Professor; Dr. Barbara Jackson, Professor of
Chemistry; Dr. Comfort Asanbe, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction;
and Mr. Kevin Liska, Director, Business Media Center. The university is
eager to offer more.
TTU research/service agenda can be generally categorized into four
areas: Manufacturing Process Research, Education and Information,
Detection, and Remediation, described below.
Manufacturing Process Research: Faculty in the TTU Chemistry
Department, the doctoral program in environmental sciences, and the
Water Center have recently been involved in a project sponsored by the
Governor's Office and the 13th Judicial District Drug Task Force. Using
``street'' methods and solvents for extraction certified by the
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, these studies demonstrated that 50
to 70 percent extraction efficiencies for pseudoephedrine can be
achieved from most combination products (such as cold medicines that
combine pseudoephedrine with other drugs) typically associated as
viable sources for the compound that is turned into meth. TTU partnered
with Dr. Sullivan Smith on these experiments. Charlotte Burks, our
state senator and a member of the Drug Task Force and Governor's Task
Force on Methamphetamine Abuse, credited our research in this area for
helping speed the development of the Governor's new bill.
Education and Information: Several of TTU's social service areas,
including the ``Make a Difference'' project in the College of
Education, regularly see the collateral effects of meth abuse on
children. TTU enjoys a very close partnership with school systems
throughout the Upper Cumberland Region of Tennessee and hosts the
regional P-16 Council. Faculty and staff from the Colleges of
Education, Arts and Sciences, Engineering and Business Administration
have all collaborated to help develop educational programs addressing
meth abuse. Some of these projects have involved curricular
initiatives, with the intent of ``embedding'' anti-meth messages in the
elementary school curriculum. Early work was done in Cumberland County,
Tennessee, and is now being expanded into Putnam and Jackson Counties.
Business Media Center Director Kevin Liska, in collaboration with
the Putnam County Health Department and the 13th Judicial Drug Task
Force, created a Meth Education Tool Kit to be distributed to law
enforcement, schools, emergency services personnel, property owners and
others--all potential victims of meth manufacture and abuse. In the
form of a CD-ROM, the kit includes interviews with front-line meth
specialists from the Tennessee National Guard, the Tennessee
Departments of Children's Services and Health, the U.S. EPA and Drug
Enforcement Agency, and local social services and medical agencies. The
CD is organized into 22 community target markets presenting video on
meth facts, medical impact, testimonials, and financial impact--all
directed toward four age categories.
Detection: TTU Chemistry Professor Jeff Boles consults with the
Committee on bills related to meth and has been studying the meth
problem from a number of angles over the long term. Through the TTU
Center for Structural Chemistry, which he administers, he proposes a
two-part attack, the first of which is detection in a pre-warrant
situation. While early work has been done on a quick-detection kit,
collaboration with the NIST is necessary to identify existing standards
of detection and benchmark the actions by other states in order to
develop new standards at the national level. The center proposes
researching the external environment where vapors are vented outside a
home or car being used as a mobile lab. Estimates are that effective
lab detection technologies will someday help generate a turnaround time
of one day on crime scene data that would simplify the issuance of
warrants.
Remediation: The second prong in Professor Boles' research is
environmental cleanup. Toxic byproducts leave meth sites highly
contaminated, from water to air to soil to the structure that housed
the clandestine operation. Research is needed to make some form of
remediation economically feasible. Rapid environmental analysis kits,
with very short on-site cycle times, must be developed to identify
hazards associated with clandestine lab environments. More efficient
methods for identifying and appropriately containing lab products and
byproducts must be addressed. Research must yet be done on appropriate
methods and materials for ``cleaning'' a lab and remediating a site.
Standards must be developed to address the question of ``how clean is
clean?'' The potential for meaningful doctoral research in TTU's
environmental sciences Ph.D. program, as well as similar programs
nationwide, exists for exactly these topics.
RESEARCH GUIDANCE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THE ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS OF
RESIDENTIAL METH LABS
The scope of H.R. 798 provides a mechanism for making major
progress in the research and science associated with meth abuse. This
is a long-term effort, and the problem will not be solved in the next
year or even the year after. But colleges and universities in general,
and TTU in particular, want to be involved in moving toward a solution.
Listed below are some specific descriptions of how TTU is already
involved and how it can help in the future, but other possibilities for
significant research can be generated through H.R. 798.
Manufacturing Process Research: Significant additional work is needed
to understand the process and science associated with the manufacture
of meth. As mentioned previously, recent work at TTU (December 2004/
January 2005) has demonstrated that high efficiencies of meth
production can be achieved with over-the-counter products, using
inexact ``street'' methods of production. This work needs to be
expanded and refined. Work needs to be done to ``cook'' the individual
components to more fully understand all of the compounds produced
(product and byproducts). This will lead to a better understanding of
the hazards of each individual and combination byproduct. Work should
continue on decomposition research, examining methods for chemical
bonding that do not allow product decomposition.
The Chemistry of Detection: Much work remains in the chemistry of
detection. Current processes are slow and inefficient. Cycle times for
analysis are long, in a relative sense, and present problems for
efficient law enforcement. More efficient detection and diagnostic
tools must be developed so that sites can be more rapidly identified
and reaction times shortened. Long-term research should focus on
mechanisms that quickly detect the presence of hazardous chemicals in a
rental home, a motel room, or a college residence hall, much the same
as a smoke alarm detects the potential for fire. Studies should
continue on environmental sampling, with a focus on developing a
detection mechanism for sampling air surrounding a residence.
Lab Fingerprinting: Tennessee Tech has proposed research in developing
methods for ``fingerprinting'' illegally manufactured meth drugs
synthesized in a clandestine lab contain sufficient impurities allowing
such identification since these labs are generally poorly operated. No
two batches or lots of meth will be identical; thus, they can be viewed
with the same integrity as a human fingerprint. Such fingerprinting
would allow law enforcement agencies to reach back into the
manufacturing process, more clearly identifying specific products used.
Remediation: Research must continue on the processes implemented after
labs are discovered. Rapid environmental analysis kits, with very short
on-site cycle times, must be developed to identify hazards associated
with clandestine lab environments. More efficient methods for
identifying and appropriately containing lab products and byproducts
must be addressed. Research must yet be done on appropriate methods and
materials for ``cleaning'' a lab and remediating a site. Standards must
be developed to address the question of ``how clean is clean?''
Biology/Psychology: Significant additional work must be conducted on
the biological and psychological sciences associated with meth
production and abuse. Much new work on the effects of the lab
environment on children must be undertaken, focusing on both the
biological and psycho-social impacts of the environment. Many
physicians believe that current treatment paradigms for meth abusers
are highly ineffective, and much work remains to be done on appropriate
methods for faster, more complete rehabilitation. In the TTU Department
of Counseling and Psychology, Assistant Professor Comfort Asanbe, a
licensed psychologist, gathers psychological data on children who have
been removed from homes where meth was abused or cooked. Exposure to
meth could be linked to cognitive problems, and the environment is
hazardous.
Education and Science: Work also needs to continue on the interaction
of science and education to appropriately demonstrate the science
associated with meth to different age groups in order to clearly
identify the medical and social toxicity of the drug. While this is not
the focus of H.R. 798, it clearly is a related, vital component of
addressing the problem and eventually eliminating many of the hazards
associated with the clandestine production of the drug. There is also a
need for more public education and community awareness and training
modules for delivery on the Internet, providing more scientific
content.
The ripple effect of a drug like meth makes it dangerous; it is not
simply a matter of one person's addiction, it is the peripheral effects
that add up to a significant threat to society. The motivation for
attacking the problem head-on is strong. The effects of meth in the
local communities surround Tennessee Tech, a regional university
located in a rural area. The labs affect and contaminate the
environment. Production and use have a devastating effect on the
children TTU hopes to eventually serve.
As indicated earlier, alumni of institutions just like Tennessee
Tech are leading this fight. The war can only be won if it is attacked
on all sides by all constituents. Smaller universities play a critical
role; they can address this lethal epidemic. They provide the expertise
in qualified and interested faculty members who want to do this type of
research. They have an inherent motive to address the quality of
students served in local communities.
RECOMMENDATIONS/RESPONSE TO H.R. 798
Much more can be done, however, to address the problem, not only at
home, but across the country. Because of this bill, faculty at regional
universities like Tennessee Tech can make use of their expertise,
engaging in the level of research required to find real solutions to
the problem. In summary, Tennessee Tech faculty members propose
expanding research in the following areas:
In manufacturing process research, continuing our
work in demonstrating extraction efficiencies, we propose
``cooking'' the individual components to more fully understand
both product and byproduct, and we need to examine methods for
chemical bonding that do not allow product decomposition.
In the chemistry of detection, we propose developing
new standards at the national level for detection by
researching the external environment where vapors are vented
outside a home or car being used as a mobile lab. A quick-
detection kit will help generate a turnaround time of one day
on crime scene data, simplifying the issuance of warrants.
Long-term research should focus on mechanisms that quickly
detect the presence of hazardous chemicals in a rental home, a
motel room, or a college residence hall, much the same as a
smoke alarm detects the potential for fire.
A technique called lab fingerprinting--a system of
distinguishing among individual lots or batches of meth--would
allow law enforcement to tie a crime involving meth abuse to
the original manufacturer of the drug. No two batches of meth
are identical; thus, they can be viewed with the same integrity
as a human fingerprint.
In remediation, we can address more efficient methods
for identifying and containing lab products and byproducts with
a rapid environmental analysis kit, and we simply must address
the question of ``how clean is clean?'' in remediation efforts.
Combining biology with psychology, we must better
understand the physical and behavioral effects of a lab
environment on victims of meth, particularly children, in order
to devise more appropriate methods for faster, more complete
rehabilitation.
In education and science, we can expedite the spread
of curricular initiatives and research findings in an online
clearinghouse, thus addressing a glaring need for such a
central source of information.
It is not a university's place to go out into the streets to arrest
criminals, or to remove children from their homes when the environment
is unsafe, or to treat an abuser's addiction. It is a university's
place to train the professionals who take on the difficult jobs on the
front line of the meth battle. It is a university's place to conduct
research that can provide the tools these professionals need to make a
difference.
With the appropriate funding for equipment and other resources,
colleges and universities like Tennessee Tech stand ready to do their
part in implementing H.R. 798, and the results of our research can be
applied wherever meth is a problem. The Methamphetamine Remediation
Research Act of 2005 attacks the problem from arguably the most
important angle. It takes the next logical step in one of the most
perplexing and complicated elements of the meth problem--detection and
cleanup of meth manufacturing sites. The Committee's leadership in
creating this bill is to be applauded, and TTU offers its wholehearted
support in every level of this research. TTU can be a full partner in
the bill's proposed research program on detection, remediation, and
residual health effects on children.
ATTACHMENT
GOVERNOR PHIL BREDESEN'S ``METH FREE TENNESSEE'' BILL
On February 24, 2005, Governor Phil Bredesen outlined the major
components of comprehensive legislation to address methamphetamine
manufacturing and abuse in Tennessee, and took another step toward
raising public awareness by proclaiming March as ``Meth-Free Tennessee
Month.''
Major provisions of the bill (attached as an appendix to this
testimony) include:
Limitations on the sale of cold and sinus products
containing the decongestant pseudoephedrine, the vital
ingredient in the manufacture of methamphetamine. While many
pseudoephedrine products will go behind the counter in licensed
pharmacies, liquids and gel caps will be exempt from
restrictions because they currently are not deemed viable in
the meth manufacturing process.
Closure of the so-called ``personal-use loophole'' in
criminal law, which allows meth cooks to secure lighter
penalties by claiming they manufactured the drug only for
personal use.
Requirement for health professionals to report meth
lab-related burns and injuries to local law enforcement,
similar to the existing requirement to report gunshot and knife
wounds.
Creation of an online registry within the Department
of Environment and Conservation listing properties quarantined
by law enforcement due to meth-lab contamination. A separate
registry will be created within the Tennessee Bureau of
Investigation listing the names and offenses of convicted meth
cooks.
Separate from the legislation, the Governor's FY05-06 budget
includes nearly $7 million to attack the meth problem in Tennessee.
Among other items, the budget includes:
$2.4 million for increased criminal penalties for
meth-related crimes, including closure of the personal-use
loophole.
$1.7 million to launch a drug court pilot project
endorsed by the White House Office of National Drug Control
Policy to test the effectiveness of a combination of treatment
and light incarceration.
$1.5 million to launch a statewide education and
public awareness campaign.
$600,000 to provide meth-lab response training to law
enforcement and other first responders.
SUMMARY OF SB2318, HB2334
SECTION 1: Designates legislation as the ``Meth-Free Tennessee Act of
2005.''
SECTION 2(a): Requires that any product containing an ``immediate
methamphetamine precursor'' must be sold only by licensed pharmacies.
(``Immediate methamphetamine precursor is defined by Section 9.)
SECTION 2(b): Exempts products that cannot be used to manufacture
methamphetamine. Requires the Department of Health, in consultation
with the TBI, to determine whether a product can be used to manufacture
methamphetamine. Requires the Department of Health to maintain a list
of exempt products. The initial list shall include liquid preparations
and gel capsules.
SECTION 2(c): Prohibits the sale of more than three packages of a non-
exempt product or nine grams of pseudoephedrine to the same person over
a 30-day period, unless that person has a physician's prescription.
SECTION 2(d): Mandates that only a pharmacist, or pharmacy technician
or pharmacy intern working under the supervision of a pharmacist, can
sell a non-exempt product. Requires purchaser to present ID. Requires
pharmacies to maintain an electronic record of the sale in the form of
a pharmacist prescription order or a written log.
SECTION 2(e): Requires that non-exempt products must be placed behind
the pharmacy counter.
SECTION 2(f): Makes it a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by fine only,
for a pharmacy owner or operator to violate this section. Requires
violations to be reported to the Board of Pharmacy for review and
appropriate action.
SECTION 3: Requires the Department of Health, in coordination with the
Department of Education, to educate and raise public awareness of the
dangers of methamphetamine manufacturing and abuse and to direct
addicts to treatment resources.
SECTION 4: Requires health professionals to report methamphetamine
laboratory-related burns and injuries to local law enforcement, similar
to the existing requirement to report gun and knife wounds.
SECTION 5. Requires the Department of Environment and Conservation to
maintain lists of individuals and businesses qualified to test and
clean properties contaminated by methamphetamine manufacturing.
SECTION 6. Clarifies that the purpose of the existing provision to
quarantine properties in which methamphetamine manufacturing has
occurred is to prevent persons from being exposed to the hazards
associated with manufacturing.
SECTION 7. Makes it a Class B misdemeanor to offer for rent or to live
in property that has been quarantined, or to remove signs or notices of
quarantine.
SECTION 8(a)-(b). Requires law enforcement to inform the Department of
Environment and Conservation of a quarantine within seven days of
issuing the quarantine order. Requires the Department to maintain an
online registry listing properties that have been quarantined for at
least 60 days, and to remove properties after the quarantine is lifted.
SECTION 9. Defines ``immediate methamphetamine precursor'' as
ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine or any products
containing detectable quantities of those substances.
SECTION 10(a)-(f). Makes it a Class B felony for any person to initiate
a process intended to result in the manufacture of methamphetamine.
SECTION 11(a)-(f). Makes it a Class D felony for any person to promote
the manufacture of methamphetamine. Defines promoting as: Purchasing or
possessing more than nine grams of an immediate methamphetamine
precursor with intent to manufacture; delivering more than nine grams
to another person who intends to manufacture; or selling or acquiring
any substance or apparatus intended for use in the manufacturing
process.
SECTION 12. Deletes TCA 39-17-434, which addresses possession of
substances with intent to manufacture or with intent to convey to
another person (now dealt with in Sections 10 and 11).
SECTION 13(a)-(f). Establishes within the TBI a registry of persons
convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine. Requires court clerks,
beginning September 1, to forward copies of judgments against persons
convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine. Requires the Department of
Correction to forward a list of those currently incarcerated for
manufacturing methamphetamine.
SECTION 14. Makes it a Class A misdemeanor to attempt to use fraudulent
means to pass a drug test.
SECTION 15. Removes the ``personal use loophole'' from current law.
(Under existing law, methamphetamine cooks can secure a lighter
criminal penalty by claiming they were manufacturing only for personal
use.)
SECTION 16. Clarifies that if any provision of the act is held invalid
by a court, then the other provisions will remain in force.
SECTION 17. States that the act shall take effect immediately, the
public welfare requiring it.
Filed for intro on 02/17/2005
HOUSE BILL 2334
By McMillan
SENATE BILL 2318
By Kyle
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated,
Titles 39 and 68, relative to
methamphetamine.
WHEREAS, the Tennessee General Assembly recognizes that the clandestine
manufacture of the illegal drug methamphetamine is a clear and present
danger to the health and well being of the State of Tennessee; and
WHEREAS, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (``DEA'')
has found the availability and demand for methamphetamine continues to
increase throughout Tennessee; and
WHEREAS, methamphetamine is commonly manufactured in clandestine
laboratories that can be found across in Tennessee and are encountered
daily by federal, State and local law enforcement; and
WHEREAS, the DEA estimates Tennessee now accounts for 75 percent of the
methamphetamine lab seizures in the Southeast; and
WHEREAS, these clandestine methamphetamine labs pose a significant
threat because lab operators are frequently armed and are often
directly involved in the drug's distribution; and
WHEREAS, the problem of methamphetamine manufacturing and abuse is
particularly destructive to the children in our state and more than 700
children are entering state custody each year as a result of
methamphetamine lab seizures and related incidents; and
WHEREAS, clandestine methamphetamine labs also pose a potentially
lethal environmental hazard due to the unregulated and illegal use of
harmful chemicals involved in the production of methamphetamine; and
WHEREAS, the hazardous materials generated during the clandestine
manufacture of methamphetamine impose a significant burden on property
owners; and
WHEREAS, there is anticipation of an increase in methamphetamine use in
Tennessee as the drug gains popularity over other abused drugs; and
WHEREAS, this Body desires to work with law enforcement, the health
care industry, community agencies and other interested stakeholders to
develop a comprehensive strategy including treatment and public
awareness for addressing methamphetamine abuse; now, therefore,
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the Meth-Free
Tennessee Act of 2005.
SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-431, is amended by
deleting the existing language in its entirety and substituting instead
the following:
39-17-431. (a) Except as provided in this section, any product that
contains any immediate methamphetamine precursor may be dispensed only
by a licensed pharmacy.
(b)(1) A product that contains any immediate methamphetamine precursor
shall be exempt from the requirements of this section if the
ingredients of the product are not in a form that can be used in the
manufacture of methamphetamine.
(2) The department of health, in consultation with the bureau of
investigation, shall determine whether a product that contains any
immediate methamphetamine precursor is not in a form that can be used
in the manufacture of methamphetamine. In making such a determination,
the department and the bureau shall develop procedures that consider,
among other factors,
(A) ease with which the product can be converted to methamphetamine,
including the presence or absence of a ``molecular lock'' completely
preventing the product's use in methamphetamine manufacture;
(B) ease with which pseudoephedrine can be extracted from the substance
and whether it forms a salt, emulsion, or other form:
(C) any other pertinent data that can be used to determine the risk of
the product being viable in the illegal manufacture of methamphetamine.
(3) The department of health shall maintain a public list of such
exempted products. Any person may request that a product be included on
the exemption list. Such a list shall include, but not be limited to,
products in the form of gel capsules and liquid preparations that
contain any immediate methamphetamine precursor. The term ``gel
capsule'' means any soft gelatin liquid-filled capsule that contains a
liquid suspension, which, in the case of pseudoephedrine, is suspended
in a matrix of glycerin, polyethelyne glycol, and propylene glycol,
along with other liquid substances. Regardless of the product
manufacturer's labeling, a gelatin-covered solid does not constitute a
``gel capsule'' under this provision.
(c) A pharmacy shall not sell to the same person more than three
individual packages of any non-exempt product containing any immediate
methamphetamine precursor, nor shall a pharmacy sell to the same person
any combination of such products containing more than nine grams of
ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or their salts, isomers, or salts of
isomers, during the same 30-day period. The nine-gram limit shall apply
to the total amount of base ephedrine and pseudoephedrine contained in
the products, and not the overall weight of the products. The
prohibition contained in this subsection shall not apply to a person
who obtains the product or products pursuant to a valid prescription
issued by a licensed physician, certified physician assistant, or nurse
authorized pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 63-6-204, who
is rendering service under the supervision, control and responsibility
of a licensed physician and who meets the requirements pursuant to
Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 63-7-207(13).
(d) The pharmacist, or any pharmacy technician or pharmacy intern under
the supervision of the pharmacist, shall require any person purchasing
a non-exempt product that contains any immediate methamphetamine
precursor to present valid government-issued identification at the
point of sale. The pharmacist, pharmacy technician or pharmacy intern
shall maintain an electronic record of the sale under this subsection
in the form of a pharmacist prescription order as provided by Tennessee
Code Annotated, Section 63-10-206(c). The electronic record shall
include the name of purchaser, name and quantity of product purchased,
date purchased, purchaser identification type and number (such as
driver license state and number), and the identity (such as name,
initials, or identification code) of the dispensing pharmacist,
pharmacy technician or pharmacy intern. If a system is not able to
record the identification type and number, the pharmacist, pharmacy
technician or pharmacy intern shall write the identification type and
number on the prescription order. The electronic record also shall be
maintained in such a manner that allows for the determination of the
equivalent number of packages purchased and total quantity of base
ephedrine or pseudoephedrine purchased. In lieu of maintaining an
electronic record, a pharmacy may maintain a written register
containing the name of purchaser, name of product purchased, date
purchased, number of packages purchased, total quantity of base
ephedrine or pseudoephedrine purchased, purchaser identification type
and number (such as driver license state and number), purchaser's
signature and name or initials of the pharmacist, pharmacy technician
or pharmacy intern completing the transaction. The obligation of
meeting the requirements of this section rests with the pharmacist.
(e) Non-exempt products containing an immediate methamphetamine
precursor shall be maintained behind the counter of the pharmacy.
(f) A violation of any provision of this section is a Class A
misdemeanor, punishable by fine only. If the person in violation is a
licensed pharmacy or pharmacist, such violation shall be reported to
the Board of Pharmacy for review and appropriate action. If a product
is dispensed in violation of subsection (a), the owner or operator of
the wholesale or retail establishment dispensing such product shall be
in violation of subsection (a).
SECTION 3. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-24-103(b), is amended
by adding the following as a new subsection (2) and redesignating the
existing subsections accordingly: (2) As a component of the program
described in subsection (1), the department, in coordination with the
Department of Education, shall increase efforts to educate and raise
public awareness of the dangers of methamphetamine manufacture and
abuse, including but not limited to distribution of public information
materials designed to oppose methamphetamine abuse, and shall direct
persons suffering from the effects of methamphetamine abuse to proper
treatment resources.
SECTION 4. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 38-1-101(a), is amended by
adding the following language after the word ``violence,'' in the first
sentence: ``or resulting from exposure to a methamphetamine laboratory
or a methamphetamine laboratory related fire, explosion, or chemical
release,''
SECTION 5. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-212-502, is amended by
deleting it and substituting instead the following: The commissioner
shall compile and maintain a list of certified industrial hygienists
and such other persons or entities the commissioner certifies as
qualified to perform the services of industrial hygienists. Such
persons will test properties in which a process intended to result in
the manufacture of methamphetamine has occurred, as defined by Section
10 of this act, to determine if a property is safe for human use. Such
property may include, but is not limited to, leased or rented property
such as a hotel or motel room, rented home or apartment, or any
residential property. The commissioner shall also compile and maintain
a list of persons authorized to perform cleanup of property where such
a process has occurred. Such lists may be posted on the website
maintained by the commissioner.
SECTION 6. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-212-503, is amended by
deleting subsection (a) in its entirety and substituting in its place
the following language: The purpose of the quarantine provided for in
this section is to prevent exposure of any person to the hazards
associated with methamphetamine and the chemicals associated with the
manufacture of methamphetamine.
SECTION 7. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-212-503, is amended by
adding the following new subsection, appropriately designated: ( ) It
is prohibited for any person to inhabit quarantined property, to offer
such property to the public for temporary or indefinite habitation, or
to remove any signs or notices of the quarantine. Any person who
willfully violates this subsection commits a Class B misdemeanor.
SECTION 8. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, Chapter 212, Part 5 is
amended by adding the following new section, appropriately designated:
(a) Within seven (7) days of issuing an order of quarantine, the law
enforcement agency that issued the order shall transmit to the
Commissioner at least the following information regarding the site: the
date of the quarantine order, county, the address, the name of the
owner of the site, and a brief description of the site (single family
home, apartment, motel, wooded area, etc.).
(b) The department of environment and conservation shall maintain a
registry of all properties reported by a law enforcement agency that
have been under order of quarantine for at least sixty (60) days. The
registry shall be available for public inspection at the department and
shall be posted on its web site. Listed properties shall be removed
from the registry when a law enforcement agency reports that the
quarantine has been lifted in accordance with this part.
SECTION 9. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-402, is amended by
adding the following as a subsection (13) and renumbering the other
subsections appropriately: (13) ``Immediate methamphetamine precursor''
means ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine, or their
salts, isomers or salts of isomers, or any drug or other product that
contains a detectable quantity of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or
phenylpropanolamine, or their salts, isomers or salts of isomers.
SECTION 10. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 4, is
amended by adding the following as a new, appropriately designated
section:
(a) It is an offense for a person to knowingly initiate a process
intended to result in the manufacture of any amount of methamphetamine.
(b) It shall not be a defense to a violation of this subsection that
the chemical reaction is not complete, that no methamphetamine was
actually created, or that the process would not actually create
methamphetamine if completed.
(c) For purposes of this section, ``initiates'' means to begin the
extraction of an immediate methamphetamine precursor from a commercial
product, to begin the active modification of a commercial product for
use in methamphetamine creation, or to heat or combine any substance or
substances which can be used in methamphetamine creation.
(d) Expert testimony of a qualified law enforcement officer shall be
admissible for the proposition that a particular process can be used to
manufacture methamphetamine. For purposes of such testimony, a
rebuttable presumption is created that any commercially sold product
contains or contained the product that it is represented to contain on
its packaging or labels.
(e) A person may not be prosecuted for a violation of this section and
of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of 39-17-417 based
upon the same set of facts.
(f) A violation of this section is a Class B felony.
SECTION 11. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-433, is amended by
deleting the existing language in its entirety and substituting instead
the following:
(a) It is an offense for a person to promote methamphetamine
manufacture. A person promotes methamphetamine manufacture who:
(1) Sells, purchases, acquires, or delivers any chemical, drug,
ingredient, or apparatus that can be used to produce methamphetamine to
another person, knowing that the person intends to use the chemical,
drug, ingredient, or apparatus to manufacture methamphetamine, or with
reckless disregard of the person's intent;
(2) Purchases or possesses more than nine grams of an immediate
methamphetamine precursor with the intent to manufacture
methamphetamine or deliver the precursor to another person who they
know intends to manufacture methamphetamine, or with reckless disregard
of the person's intent; or
(3) Permits a person to use any structure or real property that the
defendant owns or has control of, knowing that the person intends to
use the structure to manufacture methamphetamine, or with reckless
disregard of the person's intent.
(b) Expert testimony of a qualified law enforcement officer shall be
admissible to establish that a particular chemical, drug, ingredient,
or apparatus can be used to produce methamphetamine. For purposes of
such testimony, a rebuttable presumption is created that any
commercially sold product contains or contained the product that it is
represented to contain on its packaging or labels.
(c) Possession of more than 20 grams of an immediate methamphetamine
precursor shall be prima facie evidence of intent to violate this
section. This subsection (c) shall not apply to the following persons
who lawfully possess drug products in the course of legitimate business
activities: (1) A retail distributor of drug products or wholesaler;
(2) a wholesale drug distributor, or its agents, licensed by the Board
of Pharmacy; (3) a manufacturer of drug products, or its agents,
licensed by the Board of Pharmacy; (4) a pharmacist licensed by the
Board of Pharmacy; and (5) a licensed health care professional
possessing the drug products in the course of carrying out his
profession.
(d) For purposes of this section, ``structure'' means any house,
apartment building, shop, barn, warehouse, building, vessel, railroad
car, cargo container, motor vehicle, housecar, trailer, trailer coach,
camper, mine, floating home, watercraft, or any other structure capable
of holding a clandestine laboratory.
(e) A violation of this section is a Class D felony.
SECTION 12. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-434, is amended by
deleting the section in its entirety.
SECTION 13. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 4, is
amended by adding the following as a new, appropriately designated
section:
(a) There is hereby created within the bureau of investigation a
registry of persons convicted after the effective date of this Act of a
violation of 39-17-417 involving any substance defined in section 39-
17-408(d)(2) or of section 10 of this Act.
(b) This registry shall be maintained by the bureau of investigation
and made available for public inquiry on the Internet.
(c) The registry shall consist of the person's name, date of birth,
offense(s) making him or her eligible for inclusion on the registry,
the conviction date and county of said offenses, and such other
identifying data as the bureau of investigation determines is necessary
to properly identify the person, but shall not include the person's
social security number.
(d) Starting September 1, 2005, the court clerks shall forward a copy
of the judgment of all persons who are convicted of a violation of the
offenses described in subsection (a) to the bureau of investigation.
(e) The department of correction shall forward as complete as
practicable a list of all persons currently incarcerated or under their
supervision who have been convicted of the offenses described in
subsection (a) to the bureau of investigation.
(f) The Sheriff of each county may identify such other persons for
inclusion on the registry as the Sheriff may deem appropriate, as long
as such information is accompanied by a copy of a judgment indicating a
conviction for a drug offense and a notarized letter from the Sheriff
certifying that the offense was methamphetamine-related.
SECTION 14. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 4, is
amended by adding the following as a new, appropriately designated
section:
(a) It is an offense for a person to intentionally use, or possess with
the intent to use, any substance or device designed to falsify the
results of a drug test of that person.
(b) As used in this section, ``drug test'' means a lawfully
administered test designed to detect the presence of a controlled
substance.
(c) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
SECTION 15. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 39-17-417, is amended by
adding the following as a new, appropriately designated subsection:
( ) The offense described in subsection (a)(1) with respect to any
substance defined in section 39-17-408(d)(2) shall include the
preparation or compounding of a controlled substance by an individual
for the individual's own use.
SECTION 16. If any provisions of this act or the application thereof to
any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not
affect other provisions or applications of the act which can be given
effect without the invalid provision or application, and to that end
the provisions of this act are declared to be severable.
SECTION 17. This act shall take effect immediately upon becoming a law,
the public welfare requiring it.
Biography for Robert R. Bell
Dr. Robert R. Bell became President of Tennessee Technological
University on July 1, 2000. Dr. Bell received his Ph.D. in
organizational behavior and management from the University of Florida
in 1972. Prior to assuming the presidency, he served as Dean of the
College of Business Administration at Tech.
He has served four terms on the Board of Examiners for the Malcolm
Baldrige National Quality Award. Presently, Dr. Bell is a member of the
Board of Directors for the Tennessee Quality Award (1993 to present)
and has also served on the Panel of Judges for the Tennessee Quality
Award from 1994 to present. He also served as Economic Development
Consultant to the World Bank and Lead Judge for the Panel of Judges for
the National Quality Award of the Nation of Mauritius in the Indian
Ocean in 1996 and 1997. In Mauritius, Dr. Bell served as lead examiner
and chairman of ten site-visit teams. In 2005, he was the first
recipient of the Ned R. McWherter Leadership Award presented by the
Tennessee Center for Performance Excellence.
President Bell also served a four-year term on the national
candidacy committee for AACSB International, the professional
accrediting body for colleges of business. While serving on the
candidacy committee, he served as pre-candidacy adviser for five
schools, and served as accreditation consultant to three additional
schools. He has been a member of twelve peer evaluation/site visit
teams.
Dr. Bell has numerous publications in the scholarly arena in the
fields of management, organizational design, computer science, and
quality/productivity management. These include two books and over 70
articles, cases, and scholarly papers.
Dr. Bell currently serves on the Board of Directors and is Chairman
of the Finance Committee of the Ohio Valley Athletic Conference.
Locally, Dr. Bell chaired the Board of Directors for the Putnam
County Chamber of Commerce, chaired the Regional Quality Council, and
chaired the Putnam Tomorrow Task Force for the Putnam County
Commission. He is past president of the Putnam County Family YMCA, and
has served as a member of the Quality Council for Cookeville Regional
Medical Center. Dr. Bell chairs the Cookeville Industrial Board, serves
on the Cookeville-Putnam County Chamber of Commerce Executive
Committee, is a member of the Board of Directors of the Cookeville Noon
Day Rotary and the Bryan Symphony Orchestra, and is a member of the
Executive Board of the Middle Tennessee Council for Boy Scouts of
America.
Dr. Bell and his wife, Gloria, have three children and three
grandchildren. They are members of the First United Methodist Church in
Cookeville.
Discussion
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Dr. Bell. And I was
glad to see you agree with Ms. Green, who said there is too
little research, and that is what the focus of this bill is all
about. We could argue persuasively, and Mr. Gordon and I would
agree on this, it is no difference whether he is Democrat or
Republican, on the need to provide adequate support to our law
enforcement across the country, but that is another committee's
jurisdiction.
You are right in emphasizing there is too little research,
and Dr. Martyny, you pointed out, there is a lot we don't know.
And I would add to that, and there is a lot that we don't know
about what we don't know. And so given that, I would ask you to
respond to the question: where do you think we should
concentrate the research on the resources being provided under
the provisions of this bill?
And Ms. Green, I will ask you to come first.
Ms. Green. At this particular time, I would say, from the
perspective of drafting laws and regulations that are helpful,
State and locals, really on health effects, short- and long-
term, in terms of children and adults and their exposure to the
chemicals in order to have that research for a health-based
standard. This is an area in particular where the research, in
terms of drafting, really needs to drive the content of the
particular laws and regulations. And everything really centers
around the research, which will allow the determination of
appropriate clean up and remediation standards.
Chairman Boehlert. Dr. Martyny.
Dr. Martyny. I believe that, you know, we have got a fair
amount of work looking at exposure to law enforcement officers
coming into a lot of these situations. We have a pretty good
idea on that. We have no idea what happens after the lab--the
cook is actually done, what the exposures look like, how long
do they last. This is exceptionally important because of
children and things brought into these facilities. We know that
every child that is taken out of these labs tests positive for
methamphetamine. That essentially means that there are
exposures that go on long past the lab itself. We have even had
people moving into the labs six months later that had nothing
to do with the cooking or anything like that where we have had
pulmonary fibrosis, asthma, and things like this in these
individuals, and so we need to know what is happening, why this
is happening. Is it because of the methamphetamine? Is it
because of other chemicals that are following along with the
meth? Meth is easy to test for. Some of these other chemicals
aren't. So we need better testing methods. We need to follow it
over a long-term period of time. And I agree with Ms. Green
that we need to have the toxicologists involved to see where
these levels meet. We need to look at exposures and then find
out, well, do those exposures mean that these will be the
symptoms that we would expect to see in these kids. And how do
we follow these kids and help them do better after they are
removed from the exposure? We know very little about that. So
that is the areas I----
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Dr. Bell, did you wish to comment on that?
Dr. Bell. I agree with Ms. Green and Dr. Martyny. It seems
to me that we need significantly more work on health effects,
especially on children and others who are affected by the lab.
And we also need a lot of work on byproducts. The
pseudoephedrine and the product itself, the methamphetamine, we
can identify, but we simply don't know what is there, both in
the immediate lab environment, but also outside in the soil, in
the site itself, in the trash dumps that are behind the home or
behind the trailer in which this is being made.
Chairman Boehlert. Dr. Bell and Ms. Green and Dr. Martyny,
is it fair to assume--you know the danger of assuming, but is
it fair to assume that all of you applaud the initiative from
the Science Committee in terms of putting more emphasis on
research, because that adds--there are many dimensions to this
problem. It is so much more than just law enforcement. And as
the Sheriff pointed out to me when I visited with him and had
an extensive introduction from him on the overall problem, he
showed me photograph after photograph where they made drug
busts where there are kids' toys and slides and things like
that just outside or inside pointed out to me that oftentimes
they will cook the substance in the children's room, because
they don't think the law enforcement will look in the
children's room.
And so I am so pleased, I hope all of you are, to see the
large attendance on the part of the media, because part of the
problem is heightening public awareness of the issue. And
another dimension to the problem I think that is very important
is to protect those that we call upon to protect us every
single day. So Sheriff, you have had a number of successful
busts, I know that, and a lot of coverage. And the Sheriff
related the story to me how he got a call from a reporter from
the West Coast who was surfing the Internet and came across the
outstanding record of Tioga County and contacted him about the
record.
But let me ask you, when you first started all of this,
when you started sending your teams in, what measure of
protection did you provide for your team going in to lessen the
exposure?
Mr. Howard. Well, I have to say, in the beginning, we were
a little bit uneducated. We learned very quickly, though, once
you enter into a meth lab, you have got some serious problems
to contend with. At this point, we have a 12-man entry team, as
they are called. They are HAZMAT trained. They wear protective
gear when we take a lab down. Their job is to go in, secure the
residence or the building, and take any suspects that they have
out of the building. Normally, the suspects are usually left in
place. In meth lab situations when we do a raid, we go in, we
secure the building, we take everybody out of the building, and
then we send in a full HAZMAT team to decontaminate the
building and take a look to see what they have, collect
evidence, see what chemicals are out. Once they do that, they
try to do the best ventilation that they can by opening all of
the doors, windows, and getting some fresh air into the
residence before any other law enforcement personnel enter. And
we don't normally enter until we get an okay from the HAZMAT
team.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much. And my time has
expired unfortunately, because I have got a jillion other
questions.
Mr. Gordon.
Mr. Gordon. Dr. Bell, following up on the Chairman's
questions, does Tennessee Tech have any preliminary direct or
indirect findings about the physical and behavioral effects of
methamphetamine on children and first responders?
Mr. Bell. Congressman Gordon, we do have some findings, and
I would be happy to provide those for the record. The results
are very preliminary and very small samples at this point. One
of the issues is how do we broaden this to more than one county
school system and to--within that just a very small sample. So
the--I would not claim to have a scientific analysis at this
point, but simply preliminary findings.
Mr. Gordon. And Dr. Martyny, we have talked about the
environmental contamination of methamphetamine, but what about
outside the residence? And you know, do we know anything about,
you know, how broad that contamination can be? For example, do
we have a good understanding of the possible contamination of
septic tanks or water systems, things of this nature?
Dr. Martyny. You know, I am not aware of any studies that
have actually been done, however, we have had some real tough
incidents, especially in Colorado, that I am aware of, of not
necessarily the cook itself coming out the windows, you know,
but what we have had is--one of the things they do during these
cooks is they take and use what we call a ``death bag.'' It is
a bag that has kitty litter in it that you essentially pipe the
effluence into it and then, you know, that hopefully gets a lot
of the toxic materials in there. We had a CDOT employee,
Colorado Department of Transportation employee, that actually--
that went into a roadside arrest and was opening--dumping the
materials there, and here were the--there was a ``death bag''
and the chemicals in there, he ended up having to go to the
hospital from exposure essentially from the--you know, the
people didn't want to keep it there, so they just took and
dumped it, not in their own trash, but out at these rest stops
and things like that. And we are seeing this happen more and
more. We are seeing a lot of the effluence dumped on bike
trails, on hiking trails all throughout Colorado, because that
way if you had been traced back, our enforcement has a harder
time tracing it back to people. So it is very far-reaching. It
is more than you think. It is not just the septic tank, not
just the sewers, but people just strewing a lot of the
chemicals throughout the area, trying to make it so it can't be
traced back to them. So it does reach very far out.
Mr. Gordon. And when you are saying ``tracing back,'' I--it
was interesting in some of the earlier testimony that it is
unique and it is almost like a fingerprint, and so that if you
were to find this bag somewhere else or if you--if there was a
7-Eleven that was held up and you could swipe some type of
residue, then would that match up with the original cooking
area? Is that----
Dr. Martyny. Yeah, not to anything--we have not been able
to do that. Even individual cooks might choose different
methods. There are--lots of times, these cooks are being done
by a co-op now.
Mr. Gordon. But I mean, because they do that, does that put
a fingerprint on it?
Dr. Martyny. No, not as far as we are concerned.
Mr. Gordon. Does anybody else have any information on that?
Dr. Bell.
Dr. Bell. I--we would agree with Dr. Martyny. We believe
there is--that is our chemists in the--our environmental
sciences doctoral faculty believe there is potential research
there that can track it by--because again, each cook brings
different combinations of these drugs into the environment. And
we believe there is a potential for that tracking, but there is
no data at this point that would----
Mr. Gordon. Well, that would be--I think that would really
be significant if we could get down to the point where it
actually was a fingerprint and we could--whether it were
federal crimes or anything else that we could trace it back.
Thank--did you have anything, Ms. Green, that you wanted to
add to that contamination?
Thank you very much.
Chairman Boehlert. Just to add on to that, Sheriff, when
you go in with a bust and you are not sure--if they are not
actually in the cooking process and you obtain some evidence,
you are not sure really what it is. I mean, you just can't look
at it and say, ``Well, this is meth,'' or ``This is cocaine,''
or whatever it is, and you send it off to a laboratory, is that
correct?
Mr. Howard. That is correct. We send everything out to a
lab.
Chairman Boehlert. So would it be helpful to you, and I
think I know the answer, and I am not just trying to throw you
a softball, but if we did the necessary research so we develop
some sort of detection device where you could get almost
instant analysis rather than sending it off to some lab in some
distant city----
Mr. Howard. That would be a great help. We send evidence
off now, because there is so much of it going on. We get
backlogged. The labs get backlogged on it. And sometimes it is
three to six months before we can get results on some testing.
I mean, to have an instantaneous test done would be unheard of.
Chairman Boehlert. Is that the type of research, Ms. Green
and Dr. Martyny, you think that we should engage in or at least
be feasible--and is it--do you think it is feasible, or is it
just a pipe dream?
Dr. Martyny. No, it is definitely feasible. I think that
there are a lot of different methodologies that could be used
for very--much more rapid testing than we have today. The
capabilities are there. We just haven't proven that out yet.
Chairman Boehlert. Ms. Green.
Ms. Green. Yes, I would agree that field-testing, to the
extent that it is feasible, and I would defer to my
distinguished colleagues who know all of the science
background. It would be preferable, because one of the main
complaints we receive when we are working with states is that
they don't know what they are getting into when they go into it
for first responders. And I would add that most people
reference law enforcement with first responders, but we have
also had Child Protective Services workers who have told us
that they have realized later on that they have been walking in
and out of a house, not understanding that some of what they
are seeing are paraphernalia of a manufacturing lab. So there
are a number of different individuals, in terms of first
responders, or people who would need that kind of test or
ability to detect what they are actually seeing when they go
into a house.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
Mr. Calvert.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, thank you
for this hearing.
Unfortunately for us in California, we have quite a bit of
experience with this. And we have had some progress, and some
of the law enforcement people that I have discussed this with
also need research. And one of the things that was pointed out
to me, and I don't know if any research is being done elsewhere
in the country, is on thermal signature where equipment can be
put on a police car or a helicopter or other equipment where
you can identify a thermal signature that may be coming out of
a trailer or from a motel room or from another suspicious
location. Is there anything--any research that you are aware of
that is being done, say, at Tennessee Tech or other places on
that?
Dr. Bell. There are speculations about how that could be
done, but we don't have any definitive research. A member of
the Drug Task Force is now a representative for the State of
Tennessee and has introduced some legislation to look at that.
Judd Matheny is his name, and he served early as a helicopter
pilot in marijuana, thermal analysis. And he is hopeful that
there is some, but we have no evidence of that at this point.
It is worth investigation.
Mr. Calvert. The reason I point that out, I am kind of
double--I am on the Defense Committee, also, and we have been
using thermal signatures for other purposes. And I don't know
if we could explore--I know there is an issue of posse
commatadus and how we share information and the rest, but has
there been any outreach to the Department of Defense to maybe
share in some of that technology, some of that research that is
already being done, which we use, quite frankly, quite often.
As far as you know, there hasn't been any sharing of
information?
Dr. Bell. As far as I know, sir, there has not been.
Dr. Martyny. I believe there has been some work by Sandia
Labs, trying to share information on remote sensing--developing
protocols to actually be able to do remote sensing using
forward-looking IFR and looking at some of these effluents
coming off of the materials.
Mr. Calvert. I was aware of software development working
with utility companies to find spikes in utility operations. At
that--has that been, in any way, perfected, or does that still
need some work? I know that individual motel chains have been
using that because of the problems they have had in motel rooms
and cooking and those kinds of things. But are you seeing
evidence of that in, say, upstate New York?
Mr. Howard. We haven't had any utilization of any software
in that means. The power companies in our area are more than
helpful when asked if they have had any spikes in the area, but
we haven't had any software development or usage of software.
Mr. Calvert. Well, and one last comment. I know, because of
some success we have had in California, unfortunately these
labs are being pushed out to the rest of the country, most of
the methamphetamine that is coming now into California, 90
percent probably--and I don't know what it is nationwide, is
coming out of these super labs, primarily out of Mexico and
being smuggled across. So that is a--that is probably a problem
Mr. Burns has to deal with, and I know that is probably not the
jurisdiction of this committee, but I just want to point that
out. And if you have any comment about that, that is the
difficulty we are unfortunately living under right now.
Mr. Burns. Well, you are absolutely right, Congressman
Calvert. We have to be as fluid as the traffickers. For a time,
the vast majority of pseudoephedrine was, as you know, coming
in from Canada. We responded to that threat. We have seen a
significant reduction of the super labs in your state, as much
as a 50 to 60 percent reduction. And you are correct. We
believe the threat has now moved to Mexico. I guess if there is
any good news, they are polluting the rivers and the streams
and the forests and the beautiful land in Mexico, as opposed to
your state, but the bad news is the poison continues to flow
into the United States. So we are responding.
Mr. Calvert. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
Mr. Matheson.
Mr. Matheson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Burns, it is
good to see an Iron County person here in Washington. Bring
some common sense to this town. I appreciate you being here.
Mr. Burns. Thanks for saying that.
Mr. Matheson. I wanted to ask you a quick question about--
within ONDCP. How does it break out in terms of resources that
look at meth compared to other drugs, say marijuana or whatnot?
Do you have a sense of how your resources are devoted to
different types of drugs?
Mr. Burns. Yeah, that is a great question, because we know
through household survey and we know through the monitoring the
future survey that the 19.5 million illegal drug users in this
country, about 75 percent are singularly or co-using higher-
potency marijuana. We know that about six million are using
illegal prescription drugs, about 150 percent increase in the
last five years, as many of you know, Oxycontin and Vicodin and
Lortab. About three million are using cocaine, 1.5 million
using heroin, and 1.5 million using methamphetamines. So if you
look at it macro and you look at the numbers, you would ask,
``Why methamphetamine? Why is everybody talking about this drug
when of the 19.5, only 1.5 million are using it?'' And the
reason why it has been addressed, yaba, ice, crystal, crank,
meth, whatever you want to call it, is the most destructive
drug. It gives the user an immediate feeling of euphoria and
energy, but it doesn't really give it, it just lends it. And
what the user has to pay back is at a very, very high cost.
We have, in the National Drug Office, responded. We have
responded through the Drug Endangered Children Program, or DEC,
wherein we are trying to have each state come up with a program
to deal with children that are found in these labs. We have
responded through the National Methamphetamine Chemical
Initiative, which, frankly, brings together key methamphetamine
law enforcement people from all of the jurisdictions across the
country two or three times a year to talk about trends shifting
from California to Mexico and how we respond. And I would say,
frankly, the HIDTA program, 28 HIDTA offices across the
country, out of all of the individual drugs, and these areas
pick what is their primary threat, there are more initiatives
directed towards methamphetamine than any other drug. So
hopefully, we have our priorities right.
Mr. Matheson. And do you sense, in terms of--you mentioned
the numbers from the last--but in terms of growth of use, I
assume meth is one of the higher growth rates in terms of
where--compared to the other drugs you have mentioned. Is that
a fair statement?
Mr. Burns. Except for the last one or two in the future
survey shows a 25 percent reduction among kids, which is
encouraging. And you mentioned it is good the media is here. It
is good the media is here, because I think we are spreading the
word about the destructive nature of this drug.
Mr. Matheson. A question for Dr. Bell. You mentioned how
the research you have done has been helpful in developing
legislation in your state. And I had to step out for just a
minute, so I--you may have addressed this, but I wanted to know
if you share the research with other states. And is there a
mechanism to provide access where people are sharing their
information in that regard?
Dr. Bell. Yes, there is a mechanism. The research that we
have done at Tech was done over the Christmas holidays because
of safety issues for the students. And it was embargoed until
the new bill was introduced about two weeks ago, so it is just
now flowing out. The drug task forces and the governor's office
both have mechanisms for sharing with other places.
Mr. Matheson. And in terms of development of--you said this
is going to help develop some proposed legislation that your
governor is supporting, I understand?
Dr. Bell. That is correct.
Mr. Matheson. And do you have a sense of--this is probably
not a fair question for you to ask, but are other states trying
to look at the Tennessee model now with this proposed
legislation?
Dr. Bell. My sense is other states are interested, much
like we are interested, in what is happening in other states,
so I think this model can be used in other states. There are
some challenging issues in the legislation, and certainly the
restriction of sale of the over-the-counter drug is one of
those. So I know other states will be following it with a great
deal of interest.
Mr. Matheson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Calvert. [Presiding.] Okay. Mr. Reichert.
Mr. Reichert. That is okay, Mr. Chairman. I am the new guy
here, but I do have a keen interest in this topic for a number
of reasons. Sheriff, just eight weeks ago, I was a Sheriff, so
I know exactly what you are dealing with. I was the Sheriff of
King County in Seattle, Washington. And about 10 years ago, you
may recall, DEA made an announcement, meth will be the next
dangerous drug that we are going to have to deal with across
this nation. About five years ago in King County, we pulled
together a team of people, statewide, Sheriffs, Police Chiefs,
and every discipline, and what I am pleased to see today is
that you have come together here as a team, because this
doesn't just touch law enforcement or firefighters or
environmentalists. This really touches at the heart of this
country. This touches our children.
And that is the second thing I want to talk about. One of
my grandchildren happens to be a baby who was born to a mother
who was addicted to methamphetamines. And he right now is
almost three years old and is dealing with some learning
disabilities and also has some breathing issues as, I think,
one of the witnesses testified to today as a possible health
side effect.
Third, this drug is so dangerous, it takes--if you are
hooked on this drug for one year, it can take five years to
kick it. At first, it was thought that you couldn't kick it. So
two years--one year--two years, you can lose 10 years of your
life. And that is the reality of this drug, and that is why it
is so important for us to fight this battle.
As a citizen, I was asleep one night at home, and I heard
some noise outside my driveway. So, still as the Sheriff, I
thought I would investigate that and discovered that a mobile
meth lab had pulled into my driveway in a rural area southeast
of Seattle, packed with chemicals, packed also with two people
carrying guns, looking to do a drive-by who felt they were
being ripped off, another danger to our community. We have
established, in Washington State, throughout the state, meth
action teams. And in King County, we have a 35-member team, and
I will just list some of the disciplines very quickly as to
those people who are a part of those teams: law enforcement,
social and health services, education, environmental, real
estate, federal, prosecuting attorneys, the Congressional
delegation. All of those people have come--prevention,
intervention, and treatment. Those people all have come
together to address this issue. In fact, Dr. Keppoy--I am
sorry, James Kopple, I saw walk in, was one of the people who
helped us in the State of Washington put our meth action teams
together, so I think he would be a great resource for you
coming from the National Crime Prevention Council.
My question is, as you move together as a team, do you see
this legislation helping you develop partnerships in some of
these areas that I mentioned so we can have a holistic approach
to this problem? Anybody?
Ms. Green. Congressman, I certainly do. I think this is
probably one of the best mechanisms that I have seen in recent
years to ensure--and from my perspective, one of the things I
am very much interested in is ensuring that accurate
information gets to policy-makers who are making decisions on--
about what will happen in their state. And I think it is one of
the best mechanisms I have seen to ensure that, on an issue
where legislation and policy must keep pace with innovations in
research and technology, to ensure that state-of-the-art
information gets to all of the different constituencies and
disciplines that have to, basically, address the issues arising
from methamphetamine laboratories, whether it is trying to
decide what particular protocols to use with children who have
been removed or attempting to deal with what kind of liability
issues and cleanup issues you may have, either in a rural area,
or as people are now talking to us about, in apartments and
hotel rooms. I think it is a very critical mechanism to ensure
that kind of collaboration and the widespread dissemination of
accurate information about how to address these methamphetamine
laboratories.
Mr. Reichert. Let me just comment, too, that when we
started our effort to fight meth in the State of Washington, we
were number two in the state as to the number of meth labs in
the country. Today, we are number six. The county just south of
King County, where I was the Sheriff, last year, however, had
500 labs. King County had about 250. We have made some
progress. And I think with NCPC's help, hopefully you could
connect up with the National Crime Prevention Council, and
there is also another organization called the Pierce County
Alliance, which has made great progress in studying the effects
on children and also some of the effects on the community as a
whole.
So thank you very much, and thank you all for your hard
work. And Sheriff, it is nice to have another Sheriff in town.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Congressman.
Mr. Green.
Mr. Green. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member.
I salute both of you and compliment you for having these
hearings, and quite candidly, for being--allowing me to be a
part of these hearings as a neophyte.
I want to commend the panel. This has been an outstanding
panel, and what you have said has been more than edifying. It
has truly been an education for me today to hear much of what
you said.
I have any number of concerns, because the omnipresent
nature of the problem seems to create quite an enigma for you.
I have noticed that we seem to be in our infancy as we are
quarreling our empirical data, which means that we haven't
quite gathered the sense of direction that we are looking for.
And some of my questions will relate to the sense of direction.
But first, Ms. Green, you mentioned liability issues just a
moment ago. Do we have any sense of what type of standardized
notice should be accorded a property owner who has had the
unfortunate circumstance to develop in his property with a lab?
Ms. Green. Yes, Congressman. There are several statutes, in
particular Washington State and Oregon, that have dealt quite
significantly with notice issues. And there are really three
types of notice issues that are dealt with with respect to an
owner. The first is when someone, like law enforcement, first
notices a lab, what kind of notice do they have to make to
state officials and then what is the responsibility of those
particular agency officials to contact the owner to see if the
owner knows. There is also a particular notice that has to be
placed in certain county auditor records. In some respects,
people are attempting to put notice in certain title records
and other kinds of public notice property records that would
allow an owner, even an absentee owner, to identify, upon
regular perusal of those types of records. There is also a
different type of notice, which is a build-upon to what you
just suggested in terms of the owner knowing, which is a future
owner, a potential purchaser. There are particular states that
would require a seller to give notice to a potential purchaser
that there has been a particular meth lab on that particular
property. And the potential purchaser has a number of days to
decide whether or not to cancel that particular contract.
So many states, particularly in the west, are addressing
that particular notice type of issue.
Mr. Green. Thank you.
And Dr. Bell, you talked about what I will call an--well, I
suppose an intrastate integrated system that is being
developed. How can we efficaciously move to an interstate
integrated system?
Dr. Bell. As you said earlier, we are in the infancy of
many approaches to addressing this problem. The data collection
is one, but certainly the collaboration is still in a learning
stage, too. In most states, there is a task force that links to
other states. The governor's office in our state, and I presume
in most, has a coordinator. And there are individual mechanisms
that are loosely linked at this point that, over time, I think
we will see much more maturity. But certainly, at the federal
level, it would help to continue the efforts that are already
there to coordinate through the number of agencies that are
currently involved. DEA, National Institutes of Health (NIH),
all of these, right now, are involved in one way or another. I
think the issue is going to be how we find a focused group that
truly is interstate in nature. There are several now. The
question is how to focus on one interstate activity in the
long-term.
Mr. Green. And my final question is for Mr. Howard, Sheriff
Howard.
Protecting protectors is, sometimes, expensive proposition.
Have you now a grasp on how this is impacting your budget, the
whole notion of acquiring the necessary funds so that when
people do rush into these unfortunate situations, they are
properly protected? How does that impact your budget, please?
Mr. Howard. It has impacted our budget, obviously. We are a
relatively small department. I have 126 employees. We have
applied for and received several grants for equipment and
training, which we have utilized in the last two to three
years. Also, there is a lot of forfeiture laws and seizure laws
that we have taken advantage of, and we take that monies that
we have received and turn it back into training and education
for the men and women in my department.
So we are keeping our head above water, as far as that
goes, but it is an impact on the budget. The problem we run
into is the manpower issue on labs. I have a 12-man team for
the labs, but half of that team are uniformed officers. The
other half are plain-clothes investigators. Those investigators
are the ones that really do the legwork on these labs. It takes
hundreds of hours, and that is where the budget comes into
play, the manpower that we have to pay out for those men.
Mr. Green. Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. Sheriff, would you also respond to the
first part of Mr. Green's question, the first phase of it,
because I think it is very important? What notification
requirement is there? You go in. You bust. You apprehend. You
secure the crime scene. The judicial system works its will, and
hopefully, the perpetrator ends up behind bars where he or she
belongs. But what do you do or what is the New York, Mr.
Hamilton, obligation to notify the property owner? I mean, if
it is a rented apartment or a motel, they didn't do anything
wrong, and they are not aware of anything. They are not
facilitators, but they have to know that this took place within
their property, because, as you have convinced me, and you have
shown me the evidence, you know, the property is contaminated.
So an innocent landowner, renting out an apartment, an innocent
motel owner renting out a room, this illegal activity takes
place, law enforcement works its will, what about the
aftermath? What about the carpets? You come in and vacuum it or
paint the wall, but there are still contaminants in the drywall
and the carpet, and the next occupier has little kids playing
around on the floor, as all little kids do. So what is the
notification requirement in New York? Who wants to----
Mr. Hamilton. Well, in New York, a standard practice is to
notify everyone that we can, everyone under the sun. And that
is not far off the mark, because there are so many aspects to
this problem, as you well know. We contact the Social Services
people, certainly the public health officials, local code
enforcement people, and that is all in addition to notifying
the property owner. The----
Chairman Boehlert. How do you do that, because the Sheriff,
after his success, reports in, and that material comes--that
information comes to you, among others?
Mr. Hamilton. Typically, a law enforcement agency, such as
the Sheriff's department who goes in to seize a lab or to
execute a search warrant, when they--if they don't already know
going in that they are dealing with a meth lab, soon realize
that they are dealing with toxic waste, the potential dumping
of toxic substances, and will routinely call the Department of
Environmental Conservation or local environmental officials. We
come in, assess the situation, and, as part of that assessment,
bring in and/or notify local public health officials, local
code enforcement people, et cetera, and the property owner. I
almost sound like I am saying that as an afterthought, but it
is not. What is important here, and in fact, maybe this is an
important point to raise, there is an anomaly for the
environmental community and the environmental agencies with
regard to dealing with methamphetamine clan labs, and that is
this: most environmental laws are meant to deal with toxic
dumping and illegal handling of toxic substances, usually by
large industrial or commercial generators. And as a result,
those are entities, which usually can be--which can be brought
to bring their financial assets to bear to finance the clean up
of the problem. For obvious reasons, with methamphetamine clan
labs, first of all, the property owner, many times, is not the
person who generated the waste. Second of all, the property
owner may be a--may not have the financial means that a large
industrial or commercial entity would to finance a clean up.
Certainly, the operators, the cookers, who set up and work the
lab, are usually not people who have the financial means that
we can latch onto to do this clean up. So there is a financial
aspect that comes in here that wasn't anticipated when some of
the environmental protection laws were passed and, you know, we
are just beginning to encounter and deal with that issue now.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you for that.
But you, in your response, you said typically the Sheriff
would report. Is it typically or what about the atypical
situations? The point is, Sheriff, are you required to report
on high when you engage in a bust like this?
Mr. Howard. No. No, we are not. We try to--as Mr. Hamilton
says, we typically notify everybody that we can and let them
know what is going on, but atypically, no, we don't. There are
times that we don't notify everyone.
Chairman Boehlert. And that is one of the causes of concern
here, because the next tenant of that motel room or that rented
apartment or the next purchaser of the motel or the apartment,
they--as I said, they don't know past history unless there is
some sort of record. I mean, good gosh, we require a termite
report. If you sell a property in Virginia, you have got to
certify that it is termite free. Maybe we ought to do something
along this line, not for every residence, obviously, but
perhaps for those, Ms. Green, that where we know illegal
activity has taken place. One, there should be some sort of
notification requirement, it seems to me, to make sure that the
proper people do know, but a requirement, not just, ``Oh, tell
if you get a chance.'' Well, that is enough said.
Mr. Schwarz.
Mr. Schwarz. Am I correct--and this is for Mr. Burns. Am I
correct in thinking that methamphetamine, because of some very
obscure medical uses, is still schedule two?
Mr. Burns. Are you talking about on a----
Mr. Schwarz. I am talking about the substance itself, when
they--you can still legally make it, some companies do, that
has some--they use it for narcolepsy.
Mr. Burns. The drug methamphetamine has no legitimate
medical use.
Mr. Schwarz. The----
Mr. Burns. None.
Mr. Schwarz. Then why is it not schedule one?
Mr. Burns. In many----
Mr. Schwarz. States it is.
Mr. Burns. Yes.
Mr. Schwarz. We have made it schedule one in Michigan, but
federally----
Mr. Burns. Yes.
Mr. Schwarz.--I believe it is still schedule two, is it
not?
Mr. Burns. Yes, the--that is one of the issues that we are
addressing in the synthetic action plan.
Mr. Schwarz. Yeah. And Mr. Chairman, that is one thing that
we should do federally is put it in statute, I believe, that
methamphetamine is a schedule one substance and has no
legitimate medical use, because, in fact, there are a number--I
am a physician. That is--let me preface my remarks with that.
There are other Central Nervous System (CNS) stimulants
around----
Mr. Burns. Correct.
Mr. Schwarz.--that can be used, and methamphetamine itself
has no legitimate use. And I agree completely with that.
Chairman Boehlert. Good point. Is that something, Mr.
Burns, that we can get you to seriously entertain as you tackle
this problem?
Mr. Burns. Certainly, Mr. Chairman. Let me just say Ms.
Green and I run into each other probably two or three times a
month crisscrossing this country trying to deal with individual
states who are struggling with this. I was with Congressman
Walden a couple of weeks ago in Oregon. In Oregon, Congressman
Hooley would know that the penalties are more severe for
marijuana than methamphetamine. And so it has been a constant
effort on our part at the White House to go from state to state
to try and assist them individually.
Chairman Boehlert. But we all, the White House included,
and this committee included, have to be very vocal about
helping to educate the public.
Mr. Burns. Yes.
Chairman Boehlert. And you know, I find--and I am not going
to take this out of your time, but I find, for example----
Mr. Schwarz. Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert.--in town meetings from back home, to
emphasize the seriousness of this, we will start out with a
youth group, particularly, or a PTA group. You know. Experts
tell us, try something like meth today and the odds are heavily
against you living beyond the next couple of years. You will be
dead in five years. Boy, that grabs their attention. And then
you begin to talk about the problem.
Back to you, Dr. Schwarz.
Mr. Schwarz. Yeah, and I believe that methamphetamine
should be federally recognized as a schedule one substance with
absolutely no legitimate medical usage in the year 2005, and
there is no question in my mind.
Dr. Bell, are you a pharmacologist or----
Dr. Bell. No, sir. I have a Ph.D. in business
administration.
Mr. Schwarz. You are not a pharmacologist then.
Dr. Bell. I am just a college president, which means I know
a little about everything.
Mr. Schwarz. Well, there is someone on the panel, what is
the source--the ephedra that comes into this country--
legitimately, the raw ephedra, where does it come from? Is it
the Far East some place? I believe. And so----
Mr. Burns. You are correct. There are about seven major
sources internationally for both ephedrine and pseudoephedrine
that comes into the country.
Mr. Schwarz. But the raw ephedra----
Mr. Burns. Correct.
Mr. Schwarz.--itself, because we refine it and make the
pseudoephedrine. Would it not be appropriate to somehow put
federal restrictions on the substance ephedra itself as it
comes into the country? States have done it. As you know, in
numbers of states, you can only buy so many ephedrine-
containing pills at your local 7-Eleven or something of that
nature. Would it not be appropriate to somehow federally limit
the amount of ephedra that can come into the country? I ask the
question just for my own information.
Mr. Burns. Yes. In fact, that is one of the key topics,
again, of the synthetic action plan that will be out in April
is to address that very issue that you raised, that we treat it
as we do other imported drugs and control it and schedule it.
We look at the importation. We look at the bulk sales. We look
at the spot market and control it much better.
Mr. Schwarz. So would it not enhance that cause to
memorialize that concept in statute as well?
Mr. Burns. That is where we are headed. We will recommend
that to you at some point, I hope.
Mr. Schwarz. Thank you very much. And I would--Mr. Chairman
and to the people who are here testifying, I very, very
strongly support this bill, because the effluvia from meth labs
is as toxic as toxic can be, and my Congressional District in
Michigan is an area where we have bust after bust after bust of
ephedrine labs. So thank you very kindly for being here, and
thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much, Dr. Schwarz.
Let us see. Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to compliment
Ranking Member Bart Gordon and other Members of this committee,
you as well, Mr. Chairman, for realizing the necessity for the
bill that we have before us today.
I represent a rural area in Tennessee. When you look at the
different analyses, the 4th Congressional District has the
fourth most rural residency of the 435 Congressional Districts
in this country. Probably 95 percent of the Cumberland Plateau,
with a population of roughly 450,000 people live in the
District that I represent. Dr. Bell, your work with local law
enforcement, your work with the governor's task force and
others certainly needs to be recognized for starting a process
that can at least help law enforcement and others in our state,
and perhaps even the Nation, in being able to identify and find
some way to give some relief or at least some pre-warning to
law enforcement officers, the first responders who may be going
to a meth site.
We have talked some today about the capital of real estate
that an owner might lose. But the human capital that we are
losing in the area that I represent, there is, perhaps, not a
family in my District that either does not know someone or have
a close or distant relative that has--their life been taken as
the result of methamphetamine. It is a horrible affliction. It
is a cancer that continues to eat. And it is cheap, and it is
deadly. I hope this legislation--and we are talking about the
bill today. I hope this legislation will at least put in motion
the experimentation, the research, the finding of some answers
as well as warning systems for our law enforcement and for
people in the District that I represent and throughout the
space nearby the danger of methamphetamines.
Having said that, Dr. Burns, in the District I represent,
there are eight counties that have had at least 20 meth lab
busts in the last year. Pretty harsh. If you look at the
resources that you have available, $200 and some odd million I
think is what I see, how much of those--or what percentage of
those would be utilized in addressing this problem of
methamphetamine? When we are talking about a problem that has
been nationwide recognized, and certainly the areas that I
represent probably the last five to eight years, marijuana,
heroine, cocaine, other different addictive substances--
obviously we have had a constant war on drugs in the last 30 or
40 years. This new drug seems to be hitting everyone,
regardless of their economic scales or--how much--of the total
resources that you have, how much are you directing towards
solving this problem, the methamphetamine?
Mr. Burns. You know, I would have to do a breakdown and get
back to you with some specific numbers. I can tell you that
over the last two years, in 2004 and this year, in excess of
$50 million for clean up to assist the states. As I said
earlier, the HIDTA program supports State and local law
enforcement. And I think we all have to remember that the
primary responsibility is local Sheriffs and Chiefs and law
enforcement. But we have tried to, in a strategic fashion,
support their efforts. And you are correct; your state has
probably been disproportionately hit harder than any other
state in the country in the last 12 to 18 months.
Mr. Davis. Congressman Gordon's initiatives and with my
working with him has been able to find about $500,000 in grants
for a judicial district in our District. And one of the
successes I think that we are seeing, perhaps, in the area
where there may be more concentration population-wise, which is
the northern part of the plateau, by working with local law
enforcement, developing an information booklet that has been
sent, basically, to each home. But we have had this trouble in
finding those dollars to be able to at least provide an
information flow, a warning system. Bill Gibson, the district
attorney, has worked--instead of using the money for putting
more law enforcement officers, really felt that education is
something that ought to be a part of that. Are there dollars
available from your agency that could help provide funding for
educational----
Mr. Burns. There are, and I would also add that the
National Youth Anti-drug Media campaign, we have seen, I
believe, great success with marijuana, and it is our intent to,
in the near future, start doing methamphetamine ads to better
educate folks across the country.
Mr. Davis. Dr. Bell, again, thanks for the work that you
are doing.
I have got to ask you this question. If you had additional
funding available to you, and you seem to be the one college in
Tennessee that is probably doing the research of finding
solutions that we must have to address this problem, but if you
had additional funding, how much more successful could you be
in giving hope and avenues available to help fight this problem
in the up and coming----
Dr. Bell. That is a question that is very appropriate.
Obviously, it would allow us to do more basic research. It
would allow us to do more outreach. And in that sense, the
funding would simply magnify what we are currently doing and
let us leverage what we are doing.
You mentioned the booklet the drug task force has done. The
most recent product, Congressman Davis, is an interactive CD-
ROM that has age-appropriate material on it. It can be filtered
by the age of the child or the class that they are in. There is
also material on here that can be focused on sanitation
workers, on emergency medical services workers, on firemen, or
on police, or many others. So we are moving to a point that we
can help deliver to school systems and to others not just
printed material, but also interactive material that a teacher
can use. They can pull off of this outlines of curricula,
interactive tests that they can work with with the students.
And things like that take resources. We currently, through that
grant that you were talking about, have the capability to
produce a number of these. I brought ten copies for the
Committee as a pre-release, but this should be going public
next week, and I will be sure that each Member of the Committee
is given one. Again, further resources would let us distribute
that in a much wider fashion.
Mr. Davis. I thank the panel for being here. Mr. Chairman,
thanks for giving me an opportunity.
I yield back the rest of my time.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Dr. Bartlett.
Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much.
Do I understand that ephedrine is one of the substances
used in making this drug? I am searching a very old memory
bank, but what is the relationship between ephedrine and
adrenaline?
Mr. Burns. I would defer to Dr. Schwarz.
Chairman Boehlert. Dr. Schwarz.
Mr. Schwarz. They are vaguely related in that they are both
stimulants. Adrenaline is a vascular stimulant that has
vasoactive properties, as does ephedrine. They are both, in
fact, very strong bronchi-dilators, that is why when you have
somebody in status asthmatics, they are--their bronchi are just
clamped right down. You give them adrenaline and people who are
asthmatics, frequently asthmatics, will be taking an ephedrine-
containing compound as well as a dilator. So they have numbers
of very similar pharmacologic effects.
Mr. Burns. That is exactly what I was going to say.
Mr. Bartlett. It was my memory that ephedrine has
essentially physiologically the effects of adrenaline. Does
that mean that one of the effects of this drug is that it is
sympathomimetic? That is one of the effects of the drug? Okay.
Yeah, what we are doing here today reminds me a little of
the story of the Thursday night prayer meetings in a rural
church where every week Brother Jones in his prayer would ask
the Lord to remove the cobwebs of sin from his life. And after
several weeks of this, one of the ladies, when it came her time
to pray, prayed that the Lord would please kill the spider of
sin in Brother Jones' life. What we are dealing with here, of
course, are the cobwebs. The spider here is obviously the
demand for this drug. And as long as there is a demand for this
drug, there will be laboratories making this drug. Do you feel
that we are directing enough resources to understanding the
culture that could support this kind of drug use, because
ultimately, that is the only way we are going to solve this
problem? If we don't understand the culture and stop the
demand, you are going to forever be mopping up these--the
consequences of these labs. Yeah. We need to do that. You know,
as it said in the New Testament, ``This ought you to have done
and not to have left the other undone.'' And we have got to mop
up these labs, but at the same time, we have got to be moving
aggressively to understanding the culture that supports this
level of use. Do you think that we are nationally committing
enough resources to understanding this? This is a dumb thing
for young people to do, and it is clearly a matter of
education.
Ms. Green. Congressman, based on what we are seeing when we
work with states, I--my answer would be no. We are not doing
enough. I think because many states were hit with the
ballooning of the meth labs, their attention primarily focused
on taking the labs down and the consequences to the children
removed. I think there is insufficient attention and
insufficient resources, both nationally and in every state,
that is being directed towards the education end of it, also
the treatment end of it and understanding what treatment is
available and providing adequate levels and modalities of
treatment to address the problem, so we don't have, as the
Director of Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics told me, in their
instance, the reason their meth labs were out of control is
they had active addicts repeatedly returning to the culture and
making the methamphetamine. So my answer would be, based on
what I am seeing at the state level, no.
Mr. Burns. Let me just add to that. Those of us from the
West Coast have been dealing with this for over 20 years. We
have been shouting and screaming, ``It is coming. It is
coming,'' and talking to my colleagues, district attorneys from
the East Coast years ago, they had no idea what methamphetamine
was and possibly shame on us because we didn't do a better job.
But the good news is, Congressman, we are not only dealing with
the cobwebs, but we are also dealing with the spider on the
West Coast. Labs are down. There has been a tremendous decrease
in not only super labs but small, toxic labs. We are getting
much smarter. We are working together, as Congressman
Reichert--Sheriff Reichert said with teams and bringing people
together. But in some states, labs are going through the roof.
And we need to take what we have learned in California and
Nevada and Utah and Oregon and Washington and get with our
brothers and sisters on the East Coast to help. And we are
doing that.
Mr. Bartlett. The wind blows from west to east, and many of
our national problems seem to come from west to east, don't
they?
Thank you very much.
Mr. Burns. Thank you.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you.
Mr. Carnahan, talk about middle America.
Mr. Carnahan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member
Gordon.
Yeah, I am from the State of Missouri, and we have the
unfortunate distinction of being at the top of the problem.
That is not what we want to be known for. But thank you for
being here and for your time and your expertise today.
I wanted to start by asking that law enforcement, and
Sheriff, maybe I will direct this to you, but with the
statistics that you mentioned that 50 percent of law
enforcement are often affected by health issues when they have
been exposed to these labs and that we don't know enough about
the health impacts and we really don't have a set standard,
what guideline or standard do you see in use in law enforcement
now to protect law enforcement when they are subject to
exposure?
Mr. Howard. Well, we take all steps when we take a lab
down. We don't take any chances. In the beginning, as I said
earlier, we took some chances and got educated very fast. And I
have to refer this to Dr. Martyny. He was the one about the 50
percent of law enforcement officers being overcome by fumes or
being hurt. But we have, to this point, have not had any
officers suffer any type of injuries because of the chemicals
or anything because of the precautions we have taken. We do not
take any chances. And if there is any member of the team who
thinks they are going to take a chance are immediately removed.
We do not put up with any of that. There are serious
consequences of going in without protection on. As we have seen
on the video clip, it is very dangerous. So we take every
precaution we can take or we won't go in. It is as simple as
that.
Mr. Carnahan. Thank you.
I also wanted to follow up on the issue of cost in terms of
what communities and law enforcement are having to bear. Do you
see around the country much use of additional financial
penalties or property forfeitures from property that is
involved? And is that being put back into the law enforcement
to help out--to help with the cost of the problem?
Ms. Green. Congressman, based on what we are seeing, yes.
What is happening now is they are attempting to seize and
forward some of the properties, use the proceeds, and that
would go back into law enforcement. They are creating specified
penalties, and then that would go into particular earmark funds
at times with that money being able to go back to law
enforcement. Even so, what I would say is, based on what we are
seeing, given the pace at which the labs are multiplying, most
of the state resources are still being drained in the direction
of dealing with meth labs. So they are attempting to use those
mechanisms to the extent they can, but it is still insufficient
at this point.
Mr. Hamilton. Congressman, just to add to that, in usual
law enforcement situations where you seize property that was
either used in the commission of a crime or was the--or was
otherwise connected with the crime, you are seizing an asset,
which does have some financial value to it. One of the problems
that we are finding is that to seize a--what was the site of a
meth lab, whether it was a residence or a garage or a motor
vehicle, because of the contamination and the deadly
contamination associated with that building or that vehicle, it
no longer has financial worth associated with it. And in fact,
in some instances, it is estimated that the cost of
decontamination or cleaning up the residence may exceed what
would have been the normal market value of the property. So it
is another one of the anomalies that comes into play when you
are dealing with these clan labs.
Mr. Carnahan. And finally, Dr. Bell, you had mentioned that
you had done--had some preliminary findings with your research,
and I wonder if you could briefly describe what those were?
Dr. Bell. Which research, sir?
Mr. Carnahan. With regard to--I thought you were describing
with regard to health impact to people that were exposed.
Dr. Bell. The studies that we have been involved in have
been more the psychological and learning disabilities impact.
And again, they are very preliminary. But some of the areas
that we are interested in and our district attorney and
emergency services personnel have worked with us on these, when
you get a very young child who is in the lab at the point that
the team moves in, their first confrontation is with a group of
armed individuals who are dressed in either SWAT or HAZMAT
suits. They appear to feel like they have been attacked. They
are immediately stripped of all of their clothing, and they are
put, Congressman Gordon mentioned the bunny suit, in counties
where there is planning and resources, that is true, but in
other counties, they are simply wrapped up in a space blanket
or some kind of an aluminum foil and taken to an emergency room
where they know no one, et cetera. The effect in the short term
is traumatic. What we are unclear of, at this point, is what
the long-term effect is. Clearly, there are biochemical effects
that have the potential for dramatic learning disabilities. So
there is some psychological short-term effect. Some of our data
indicates that may go away within a few months, especially
among younger children. But the learning disabilities and the
other adverse effects, like asthma and breathing problems,
obviously are going to affect that child for many, many years.
Our data is very preliminary, so we are dealing with a one-
county school system and a very small sample. And as
Congressman Davis said, more resources will help us address
larger populations.
Mr. Carnahan. Thank you. And thank you all for being here.
Chairman Boehlert. Thank you very much.
Ms. Jackson Lee.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me
thank both you and the Ranking Member for this hearing.
And let me also thank the Ranking Member for the initiative
of this legislation, which I was delighted to be a co-sponsor.
Texas is a large state, but--we are large, but we are not
without impact of meth labs. And I just site, for the record,
that as of February 24, 2005, the State of Texas recorded 422
incidents related to meth labs, and that may mean explosions or
other incidents that the cooks cook up, if you will. And we
know that nationwide, there are 16,326 incidents. So we might
say that we are long overdue in sort of getting our hands
around this in a national manner.
And I would pose two questions, and I thank you for your
indulgence. We are in several hearings that are occurring at
once, but I thought that this was such an important first
start, and this legislation, I hope, will move very quickly,
because I am very interested in the local and federal
collaboration that I think is important in any fight against
the proliferation of drugs of any kind.
Just a few years ago, I passed the date rape drug, that is
GHB, that people were making in bathtubs. And I am sure that
law enforcement and others came across this industry of young
people--even the formulas were on the Internet, a new,
sophisticated use of the Internet.
Let me ask just two specific questions. And Ms. Green, if
you would tell me--I chair, also, the Congressional Children's
Caucus and am interested in the negative impact on children.
One, these are homes, mostly. Sometimes the homes are sold.
Is--the legislation that we are looking at today, can it
actually save lives?
Ms. Green. I believe so, Congresswoman, because what is
unknown now about the research is exactly what effects is the
exposure having on children. Without that knowledge, it means
that we don't know what protocols we should be using to address
the potential problems, the immediate problems of the child,
but also potential problems in the future. And I think with
this type of bill, the research first, but also the ability of
this mechanism to disseminate the information to decision-
makers throughout the country will ensure that the proper
protocols are developed so that the children can be adequately
taken care of in the immediate, but also throughout their lives
to address whatever potential long-term consequences they might
be suffering as a result of the exposure.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I think if there is a bottom-line crux or
anchor or mantle for this hearing it is that this legislation
can save lives. We are now looking at the aftereffects of the
firefighters, first responders, and others who went into the
building, fought the fires of 9/11. We will probably look at
that, beyond the tragedy of those who lost their lives, those
who now live with that ailment, if you will, of having gone in
with those kinds of fumes or chemicals meshed together. So I
think the question of saving lives is crucial, and in--
particularly in science, good sciences, it is important, but
the good science that leads to saving lives.
I would also like to ask Dr. Martyny, who mentioned the
lack of guidelines for--and forgive me if I was out at another
hearing when this was discussed, on first responder equipment.
What do we know about this? Both law enforcement, meaning
police on the police side, but our firefighters, what do we
know about the lack of guidelines or how quickly we need to
move toward providing some answers for that to ensure safety on
that aspect as well?
Dr. Martyny. You know, I think we have made huge strides in
the last, maybe, one or two years. I think, as the Sheriff
mentioned, we have--most law enforcement agencies nowadays are
sending people in with self-contained breathing apparatus and
good clothing, good protective to make sure, number one, that
they aren't injured. Number two, another factor that we are
concerned about is them getting contaminated and them bringing
the contamination home to their families. So we are interested
in both of those. DEA has been really good at training a lot of
these officers, and I think we are going to get better and
better. We still have--are still trying to get the word out.
And the more training and education we can do, the better off
we are, but we have moved a long ways in a short period of
time, and I think we will continue to move.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, I will just conclude my questioning.
I thank all of the panelists, and your testimony will be well
reviewed, and I--my lack of questioning is not out of a lack of
appreciation for your statements, but I just want to emphasize
that one element of this bill does require a study by the
National Academy of Science on the long-term health impacts of
children taken from meth labs, again usually homes, and also on
first responders. And I would like for this committee to
monitor the progress being made on the guidelines and usage of
better equipment for first responders of all kinds, because I
think your point is very well taken.
I thank the Chairman, and I yield back my time.
Chairman Boehlert. And I thank the gentlelady for her
intervention. And as you can gather from what Ms. Jackson Lee
said and what has been said by many of our panel members
previously, this is a subject of great concern. It is growing,
and we want to contain it, but more importantly, we want to
learn how to respond to it in an appropriate manner to protect
all of those innocents out there who are just so vulnerable.
I want to thank all of you for being facilitators for this
committee as we go about our business. Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
Appendix:
----------
Additional Material for the Record
Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R. 798,
Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005
Section 1. Short title.
The Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005
Section 2. Findings.
Section 3. Voluntary Guidelines. Requires the Assistant Administrator
for Research and Development at the EPA (EPA), in
consultation with the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), to establish
within one year voluntary guidelines for the
remediation of former methamphetamine labs,
including preliminary site assessments and the
remediation of residual contaminants.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to consider relevant
standards, guidelines and requirements in federal, State and local laws
and regulations, the varying types and locations of former
methamphetamine labs, and the expected cost of carrying out any
proposed guidelines in developing the guidelines.
States that the voluntary guidelines are to be used to assist State
and local governments in the development and implementation of
legislation and other policies to apply state-of-the-art knowledge to
the remediation of former labs. Requires the Assistant Administrator to
work with State and local governments and other relevant nonfederal
agencies and organizations, including through the conference in section
5, to promote and encourage the appropriate adoption of the voluntary
guidelines.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to periodically update the
voluntary guidelines, in consultation with states and other interested
parties, as necessary and appropriate to incorporate research findings
and other new knowledge.
Section 4. Research Program.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to establish a program of
research to support the development and revision of the voluntary
guidelines in section 3. Requires research to identify methamphetamine
laboratory-related chemicals of concern, assess the types and levels of
exposure to chemicals of concern that may present a significant risk of
adverse biological effects, better address biological effects and
minimize adverse human exposures, evaluate the performance of various
methamphetamine laboratory cleanup and remediation techniques, and
support other priorities, identified by the Assistant Administrator in
consultation with states and others.
Section 5. Technology Transfer Conference.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to convene within 90 days and
every third year thereafter a conference of State agencies and other
individuals and organizations involved with the impacts of former
methamphetamine laboratories. States that the conference should be a
forum for the Assistant Administrator to provide information on the
voluntary guidelines and the latest findings of the research program as
well as an opportunity for the non-federal participants to provide
information on their problems, needs and experiences with the voluntary
guidelines.
Requires the Assistant Administrator within three months to submit
a report to Congress that summarizes the proceedings of the conference,
including any recommendations or concern raised and a description of
how the Assistant Administrator intends to respond to them. Requires
the report to be made widely available to the general public.
Section 6. Residual Effects Study.
Requires the Assistant Administrator to enter into an arrangement
with the National Academy of Science within six months to study the
status and quality of research on the residual effects of
methamphetamine laboratories. Requires the study to identify research
gaps and recommend an agenda for the research program in section 4.
Requires the study to focus on the need for research on the impact of
methamphetamine laboratories on residents of buildings where labs are
or where located, with particular emphasis on the biological effects on
children and on first responders.
Section 7. Methamphetamine Detection Research and Development Program.
Requires the Director of NIST, in consultation with the Assistant
Administrator, to support a research program to develop new
methamphetamine detection technologies, with emphasis on field test
kits and site detection and appropriate standard reference materials
and validation procedures for methamphetamine detection testing.
Section 8. Savings Clause.
Provides that nothing in this Act shall be construed to change the
regulatory authority of the EPA.
Section 9. Authorization of Appropriations.
Authorizes $3 million for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009
for the EPA. Authorizes $1.5 million for each of fiscal years 2006
through 2009 for NIST.
Prepared Statement of the National Multi Housing Council/National
Apartment Association Joint Legislative Program
Chairman Boehlert, Ranking Member Gordon, and distinguished Members
of the Science Committee, the National Multi Housing Council (NMHC) and
the National Apartment Association (NAA) appreciate the opportunity to
share the views of rental housing providers as the Committee considers
the Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2005. The National
Multi Housing Council and the National Apartment Association represent
the Nation's leading firms participating in the apartment industry and
are committed to providing safe, affordable, and accessible home
choices for the 21 percent of all households who live in apartment
homes.
NMHC's membership includes the principal officers of the largest
and most prominent apartment owners, developers, managers and lenders.
NAA is the largest national federation of state and local apartment
associations with 164 affiliates and 31,000 professionals who own and
manage more than five million apartments. NMHC and NAA jointly operate
a federal legislative program and provide a unified voice for the
private apartment industry.
The manufacture of illicit methamphetamine (meth) in makeshift,
clandestine laboratories is a growing concern throughout the United
States. In the production process, manufacturers utilize various
volatile and highly toxic chemicals, resulting in an acute risk of
poisoning, fire and explosion. Moreover, these labs may pose a health
and safety threat after drug production ceases, due to the presence of
hazardous manufacturing byproducts and residual production chemicals,
if cleanup has not been done properly.
Given the mobility and small size of illegal drug laboratories,
they can be located on any type of property and pose considerable
challenges for any property owner. However, they are particularly
problematic when located in residential, rental properties. In addition
to the risk of fire and explosion, the chemical residue left behind by
these labs may present a hazard to residents. More research is
necessary to evaluate the efficacy of remediation techniques for the
indoor environment following its contamination with methamphetamine or
the byproducts of its production.
There is a widespread understanding in the commercial real estate
industry that an identified, illegal drug laboratory must be reported
to the appropriate law enforcement authorities. Typically, law
enforcement officials will confiscate or dispose of all drug-
manufacturing equipment and chemicals found at the site, but after this
bulk cleanup is completed, the property owners face the daunting task
of dealing with any residual contamination. This is complicated by the
fact that there are many unsettled questions regarding appropriate
clean up and restoration of affected properties.
Property remediation standards are necessary.
Since there is a lack of consensus about how to proceed once the
crime scene tape has come down, many property owners are questioning
what, if any, additional cleanup needs to be done to safeguard the
health and safety of their maintenance workers and residents. Recently,
several states have enacted mandatory cleanup statutes; however, there
are no federal guidelines or standards addressing remediation of meth-
contaminated properties, and, with few exceptions, even the states with
mandatory cleanup laws have failed to define levels of contamination
and appropriate abatement methods. Those cleanup guidelines that do
exist acknowledge that the residual health effects and safe
contamination levels of meth-related chemicals are largely unknown,
which means these standards are conservative and not directly related
to scientific or medical findings.
The lack of scientific evidence or national property remediation
standards has resulted in widely divergent state-required cleanup
practices and requirements. Currently, ``safe'' meth contamination
levels range from 0.5 mg/ft2 to 0.05 mg/100 cm2.
Additionally, some states' standards only address the residual
methamphetamine level itself, while others establish acceptable levels
for meth-related chemicals, such as mercury, lead, volatile organic
chemicals and corrosives. Finally, some states require cleanup to be
completed by a state licensed or otherwise certified remediation
professional, while others do not.
This has created tremendous uncertainty and confusion for property
owners trying to determine the best practices for successful
decontamination as well as their responsibilities under these new and
emerging laws. It has also subjected apartment owners and operators to
malicious or negligent mistreatment by remediation contractors, who may
recommend a variety of unproven, unnecessary or costly decontamination
strategies.
We strongly support the provision of H.R. 798 that directs the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to develop remediation guidelines in
cooperation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Since safe and technically sound guidelines are fundamental, we
question, however, the notion that those guidelines should be
voluntary, rather than mandatory. Mandatory guidelines could be revised
in light of applicable technological developments.
Research on potential health effect of residual chemical exposure is
necessary.
Given the disparities in cleanup protocols, property owners are
also concerned about the potential liability associated with any
residual contaminants. Accordingly, we strongly support the provision
of H.R. 798 that directs the National Academy of Sciences to undertake
a study to determine what is known regarding the potential health
effects of contaminants resulting from methamphetamine laboratories.
Improved methods of detection are essential.
Property owners may not be aware that an illegal drug laboratory
has operated on their property. Clandestine meth laboratories are
highly mobile, and manufacturers are learning to hide the tell tale
signs of meth production through various means, such as using new and
reportedly, odorless processes. Since meth contamination may be
imperceptible to the naked eye, there is an essential need for reliable
rapid detection protocols. Although private vendors are currently
marketing such tests, validation of these devices and improved accuracy
of testing methods in general is currently an unmet need.
Health and safety concerns have motivated several states to enact
notice and disclosure laws requiring full disclosure of a properties'
use as a clandestine methamphetamine lab to all prospective buyers or
residents. Typically, disclosure is only required while a property is
in fact ``contaminated.'' However, due to the uncertainties inherent in
current decontamination practices, some states have enacted stricter
laws requiring disclosure even after the property has been
decontaminated. Requiring disclosure of contamination that has been
appropriately remediated unfairly stigmatizes and devalues the property
and will ultimately serve to exacerbate the existing shortage of
affordable housing.
Therefore, it is necessary to develop cleanup guidelines and
standardized decontamination practices for meth labs, and establish
guidelines for the training and certification of decontamination
professionals. This will protect property owners, residents, and
remediation professionals by providing a clear foundation for the
remediation of affected properties. This will also provide the public
with much needed information about meth-related environmental
exposures.
This legislation takes a crucial first step towards achieving this
goal. Research is fundamental to the establishment of effective,
health-based cleanup standards. It will provide insight regarding safe
exposure levels to meth-related chemicals, appropriate testing methods,
and decontamination safety and best practices. This information will
aid property owners in their continued efforts to protect the health
and safety of all residents, employees, and visitors.
In summary, NMHC/NAA support H.R. 798 because it (1) directs
research to determine effective means of decommissioning meth labs on
residential property, (2) requires federal authorities to establish
threshold levels of contamination that protect the public health, and
(3) funds the development of rapid detection methods so we can monitor
our indoor environments. In addition, we support the certification of
trained individuals to remediate meth labs. After following the
guidance of these trained professionals in remediating the property,
the property should be by definition ``safe;'' therefore, disclosure of
the former presence of the illegal lab should not be required.
Thank you for your consideration of these points.