Pushing Back Against Meth:

A Progress Report on the Fight Against 

Methamphetamine in the United States

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Thursday, November 30th, 2006 

www.WhiteHouseDrugPolicy.gov 

www.MethResources.gov 
Pushing Back Against Meth: A Progress Report on the 

Fight Against Methamphetamine in the United States 

Summary of Findings 

This report highlights good news for America: a nationwide drop in methamphetamine laboratory 

incidents. This is a pattern observed, to varying degrees, in nearly every State. In 2004, there were 

approximately 17,750 methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures by law enforcement in the United 

States. In 2005, this number was 12,500 – a decline of more than 30%. Although 2006 numbers are not 

yet final, early 2006 data suggests that the decline is continuing at about the same pace. 

The primary reason for this positive trend is the enactment of various State laws, starting with Oklahoma 

in April 2004, which implemented restrictions on transactions involving products containing certain 

chemicals (primarily, ephedrine and pseudoephedrine) that can be used to make methamphetamine. By 

early 2006, more than 40 States had implemented some type of new restriction on retail transactions 

involving these products. Then, on September 30, 2006, the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 

2005 (CMEA) went fully into effect. The law set a nationwide baseline standard for how to legally sell 

these products, which include some popular over-the-counter cold medications. 

Although the CMEA is effective nationwide, the State laws, which vary widely in content, are concurrently 

in effect. The most notable provisions of the Federal law are also addressed by many of the State laws: 

where products containing these chemicals can be sold, how and where the products must be stored, 

what amount may be purchased or sold in a single transaction or in a month, and whether purchasers 

must show identification and sign a logbook. If the State law is less strict than the Federal CMEA on a 

certain issue, then compliance with the State provision is insufficient, and the Federal law, as a practical 

matter, is controlling. Conversely, if the State law is stricter on a certain issue than the Federal CMEA, 

then the State law, as a practical matter, is the controlling standard on that point. (In both cases, of 

course, retailers and others subject to the laws must show compliance with both.) Unsurprisingly, some 

States are a hybrid of the two situations, with the State law more lenient in some respects and stricter in 

others. 

This report attempts to describe the various restrictions in all 50 States and compare them to the Federal 

CMEA standard implemented in September 2006.1

 It is not intended as a legal guide, and should not be 

used by retailers or others to gauge their own compliance. This report attempts to measure the impact of 

the various State laws in light of the declines in methamphetamine production in the State, and it also 

notes changes in positive drug tests for amphetamine in the workplace. In some States, enactment of the 

law was followed by a swift and sudden decline in methamphetamine laboratory incidents – sometimes, 

by as much as 75% or more. In some other States, however, the decline was less dramatic. This report 

may be helpful to State policymakers interested in understanding the effect of various types of restrictions 

on the sale of these chemicals, or in considering further restrictions at the State level. 

Results of workplace drug testing for amphetamines (which include methamphetamine) are included for 

the first five months of 2006, compared to the same time period in 2005 and previous years back to, and 

including, 2000. Although the State methamphetamine precursor control laws were generally aimed at 

curbing methamphetamine production primarily (and use secondarily), workplace drug-testing information 

is provided in the hope that it will be additionally helpful data for State policymakers interested in 

understanding the extent of drug use in their State. 

The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act, in effect for exactly two months at the time of this report’s 

release, is based on these successful State approaches for curbing methamphetamine production. The 

Bush Administration is committed to the CMEA’s full implementation, and looks forward to aggressively 

pursuing further declines in methamphetamine production in the United States. 

1 The Federal CMEA has been in effect for two months prior to this publication, which is not sufficient time to measure the 

impact of the law. This report summarizes, rather than exhaustively details, each State law. Retailers and other individuals or 

organizations interested in compliance with these State laws, and with the Federal law, should consult the actual statute, any 

related regulations, and legal authorities as appropriate. Also note that this document intentionally omits minor differences 

between State laws and the Federal CMEA, and does not discuss provisions of the CMEA or State laws that apply to mail or 

Internet orders. 
A Note About Methodology 

• In reviewing the number of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, this report relies on the Drug 

Enforcement Administration’s Clandestine Laboratory Seizure System (CLSS). State and local law 

enforcement agencies report their methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures to CLSS, and these 

typically become reliable six months after the month measured, meaning that for most States, data is 

only available through April 2006. However, some States centrally track their own data, and where 

available, these numbers – which may be as recent as October 2006 – were used. 

• The implementation dates of the various State laws range from April 2004 (Oklahoma) to November 

2006 (South Carolina). States for which three or fewer months of data are available were generally listed 

as “data not yet available.” 

• This report intentionally omits discussion of special exemptions to State laws. For example, some State 

laws apply to all products containing pseudoephedrine except those in liquid or gelatin capsule form; 

other State laws exempt certain pediatric products. Instead of listing each of these exemptions, 

interested parties are urged to carefully review the actual State law or consult an attorney. 

• This report is a State-by-State analysis of national-level data. The quality of State-level information is 

contingent upon the data provided by each State. 

The report sought to utilize the most reliable and recent information available regarding State laws, 

methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures and positive workplace tests for amphetamines. The 

Administration welcomes input or information from State officials in possession of more timely information 

concerning State laws, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures or other relevant data. Contact information 

is available at www.methresources.gov/ContactUs.aspx. 
United States: The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic 

Act of 2005 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act Summary: The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic 

Act of 2005 (CMEA) went into effect in two stages. First, 

on April 8th, 2006, purchase limits, mail order restrictions 

and blister-pack requirements went into effect. Since 

April 8th, there has been a nationwide sales limit of 3.6 

grams of products containing pseudoephedrine or 

ephedrine within a 24-hour period, and a 30-day 

purchase limit of 9 grams. Additionally, all non-liquid 

forms of the product are required to be in blister packs or 

similar packaging. 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals*? Yes 

Daily sales limit: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

On September 30th, the rest of CMEA, including the 

product placement and identification/logbook requirements, went into effect. These provisions require that 

all single-entity and multi-active products containing any of those three chemicals – called “listed 

chemicals” in the bill – be kept behind a store counter or in a locked cabinet. The CMEA does not restrict 

the sale of products containing listed chemicals to pharmacies, and does not classify these chemicals as 

Schedule V controlled substances. The CMEA requires purchasers of products containing listed 

chemicals to provide photo identification, and to sign a logbook with information about the purchase. 

State

Amph 

Positives, 

2000 (JanQuest Amph 

Positives, 2001 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2002 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2004 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2005 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2006 

(Jan-May)

% Change 

2005-2006

Na tiona l 0.25% 0.29% 0.32% 0.35% 0.41% 0.48% 0.42% -12.40%

Nationwide Data Round-up: Nationally, monthly methamphetamine laboratory incidents have been 

decreasing since reaching a high of 2,049 in March 2004. In 2004 there were about 17,750 

methamphetamine laboratory incidents, compared to approximately 12,500 incidents in 2005 – a drop of 

more than 30%. In the first four months of 2006 – the most recent period of time for which this data is 

available – there were 3,160 methamphetamine laboratory incidents reported, compared to 6,472 and 

7,208 in the same time period in 2005 and 2004, respectively. This represents a 51.1% decline from 2005 

and 56.1% decline from 2004, although late data entries will probably increase final tallies of laboratory 

incidents by a small number. It is important to note that the CMEA became fully effective on September 

30th, 2006, and therefore the nationwide decline in methamphetamine laboratory incidents is due to the 

various State laws on which the CMEA is based, not the CMEA itself. Additionally, workplace drug testing 

results showed a 12.4% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 

2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06

# OF METH INCIDENTS

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

0.6%

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE

No new state law

Nation m lab incidents al eth N ti l h iti t

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

* “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine 

(EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). 
62% decline in meth lab incidents Alabama positive amphetamine workplace tests: +3.6%

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Alabama State Law: Less strict than Federal 

standard 

Summary: Alabama’s methamphetamine precursor law took effect on July 1st, 2005, except for the 

registration requirement, which was effective on October 1, 2005. 

Alabama’s law covers all products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine, and has purchase limits 

that are less strict than the CMEA. In a single sale, 2 packages or 6 grams can be sold – less strict than 

the CMEA. Although Alabama has a 6 gram purchase limit per month, this is only activated with the 

“intent to manufacture methamphetamine,” and is thus not a universal limit. Products in which the sole 

ingredient is pseudoephedrine or ephedrine can only be sold in blister packs. 

Alabama does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. Like the CMEA, Alabama has an identification and logbook 

requirement. Sole ingredient products must be kept behind the store counter or in a locked container; 

multi-active products can be kept under video surveillance (although the CMEA is stricter on this point). 

Note: On October 1, 2009, no product containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine may be sold, unless the 

product is made with “lock technology” to prevent conversion into methamphetamine. 

State

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2000 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2001 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2002 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2004 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2005 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2006 

(Jan-May)

% Change 

2005-2006

AL 0.33% 0.34% 0.38% 0.41% 0.52% 0.50% 0.51% 3.63%

Alabama Data Round-up: 

In Alabama, methamphetamine laboratory incidents declined just over 62% in the period from July 1st, 

2005, to April 30, 2006 (98 incidents), compared to the year before (260 incidents). Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 3.63% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06

# OF METH INCIDENTS

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

0.6%

0.7%

0.8%

0.9%

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE

New state law AL meth lab incidents AL amph positive rate

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

9/30/2006 Meth lab reduction: 62% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? PSE, EPH 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: -- 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 
meth lab incident data not available Alaska positive amphetamine workplace tests: -46.9%

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Alaska State Law: Slightly stricter than Federal 

standard. 

Summary: Alaska’s precursor laws took effect on June 6th, 2006. Alaska’s legislation basically 

incorporated the CMEA by reference, and without significant difference between the two, the Federal 

CMEA is the controlling standard in Alaska. One area in which Alaska’s law is stricter is the 6 gram 

monthly purchase limit on pseudoephedrine. 

Alaska does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

State

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2000 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2001 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2002 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2004 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2005 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2006 

(Jan-May)

% Change 

2005-2006

AK 0.18% 0.07% 0.25% 0.19% 0.33% 0.47% 0.25% -46.93%

Alaska Data Round-up: 

Alaska’s precursor legislation became effective in June 2006, and is too new to measure any change 

resulting from the new law. Over the last few years, 167 laboratory incidents were reported to the DEA. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 46.9% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06

# OF METH INCIDENTS

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

1.6%

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE

No new state law AK meth lab incidents

AK amph positive rate

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes

All listed chemicals? Yes

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Effective Date: June 6, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: unavailable 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 6 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 
70% decline in meth lab incidents Arizona positive amphetamine workplace tests: -3.5%

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Arizona State Law: Less strict than Federal 

standard. 

 

Summary: Arizona’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on October 31st; 2005. The 

Arizona law is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA standard is controlling in Arizona in 

most respects. 

Before the CMEA went into effect, under Arizona’s law, all products containing pseudoephedrine, 

ephedrine or phenylpropanolamine were required to be kept behind a store counter or in a locked cabinet. 

There was a 9 gram limit on daily purchases and no limit on monthly purchases. There was no 

identification and logbook requirement in Arizona. 

Arizona does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

State

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2000 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2001 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2002 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2004 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2005 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2006 

(Jan-May)

% Change 

2005-2006

AZ 0.60% 0.50% 0.64% 0.68% 0.64% 0.81% 0.78% -3.53%

Arizona Data Roundup: 

In Arizona, methamphetamine laboratory incidents declined 70% after the State law was implemented, 

with 18 methamphetamine laboratory incidents reported to DEA for the period from October 31st, 2005, to 

April 30th, 2006, compared to 61 incidents the same period on year earlier. Workplace drug testing results 

showed a 3.5% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, 

compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06

# OF METH INCIDENTS

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

0.6%

0.7%

0.8%

0.9%

1.0%

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE

New state law AZ meth lab incidents AZ amph positive rate

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 Effective Date: October 31, 2005 

9/30/2006 Meth lab reduction: 70% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes

All listed chemicals? Yes

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/9 g

30-day purchase limit: n/a

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes Identification/logbook requirement? No

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 
48% decline in meth lab incidents Arkansas positive amphetamine workplace tests: -37.9%

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Arkansas State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

standard 

Summary: Arkansas’ methamphetamine precursor law went into effect March 20, 2005. Arkansas’s 

legislation is stricter than the CMEA. 

Products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine are classified as Schedule V 

drugs under the State’s scheduling scheme. Arkansas limits the sales of products containing 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and single-entity and multi-active ingredient products must be kept 

behind the pharmacy counter. There is a 5 gram monthly purchase limit on ephedrine sales. There is also 

a 9 gram monthly purchase limit on pseudoephedrine, as in the CMEA. Arkansas has an identification 

and logbook requirement. 

State

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2000 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2001 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2002 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2004 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2005 

(Jan-May)

Quest Amph 

Positives, 2006 

(Jan-May)

% Change 

2005-2006

AR 0.48% 0.65% 0.65% 0.78% 0.92% 0.98% 0.61% -37.92%

Arkansas Data Roundup: 

In Arkansas, methamphetamine laboratory incidents declined 48% after the law was implemented, with 

364 incidents reported to DEA for the period from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, compared to 706 

incidents in the same period one year earlier. Workplace drug testing results showed a 37.9% decrease 

in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period 

one year earlier. 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06

# OF METH INCIDENTS

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

1.6%

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE

New state law AR meth lab incidents

AR amph positive rate

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Effective Date: March 20, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 48% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 3 g 

30-day purchase limit: 5g EPH/9g PSE 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 
44% decline in meth lab incidents California positive amphetamine workplace tests: -25% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

California State Law: Less strict than Federal 

standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: October 4, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 44% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: California’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect October 4th 2005.The California 

Law is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA standard is now the de facto California 

standard. 

Prior to the effective dates of the CMEA, under California law, precursor chemicals were not required to 

be placed behind the counter or in a locked cabinet. The law placed a 3 package (9 gram) limit on daily 

purchases, with no limit on monthly purchases. California law contains an identification and logbook 

requirement and covers both single-ingredient and multi-active products containing listed chemicals. 

California does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

CA 0.70% 0.71% 0.79% 0.81% 0.88% 0.89% 0.66% -25.07% 

California Data Roundup: 

In California, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 44% after the law went into 

effect, with 198 incidents reported to DEA for the period from October 4, 2005, to April 30, 2006, 

compared to 355 incidents in the same period one year earlier. Workplace drug testing results showed a 

25% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to 

the same period one year earlier. 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law CA meth lab incidents CA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
50% decline in meth lab incidents Colorado positive amphetamine workplace tests: -29.3% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Colorado State Law: Less strict than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 50% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Colorado’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in two stages: on July 1st 2005, 

and again one year later, on July 1, 2006.The Colorado Law is less strict than the CMEA, making CMEA 

the de facto applicable standard in Colorado on most points. 

After July 1st, 2005, retail sales were limited to three packages per sale. Since July 1st, 2006, there has 

been a 3.6 gram sales limit per person within a 24-hour period, virtually identical to CMEA’s standard. 

The law’s first iteration – the one that went into effect on July 1st, 2005 – did not require that 

methamphetamine precursors be placed behind the counter or in a locked cabinet. The July 1st, 2006 

changes required products to be stored or displayed in an area of the store where the public is not 

allowed access, functionally the same as the CMEA standard. 

Before July 1st, 2006, there was no identification or logbook requirement in Colorado (these requirements 

exist under both the existing State law and Federal CMEA). Colorado does not limit sales of products 

containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not 

classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

CO 0.33% 0.26% 0.32% 0.31% 0.35% 0.52% 0.37% -29.31% 

Colorado Data Roundup: 

The second stage of Colorado’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in July 2006, so it is too 

soon to measure the impact of the law’s second iteration. After the first iteration of the law went into effect 

on July 1st, 2005, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined 50% in Colorado, with 83 

incidents reported in the period from July 1st, 2005, to April 30th, 2006, compared to 166 incidents over the 

same period one year earlier. Workplace drug testing results showed a 29.3% decrease in positive tests 

for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law CO meth lab incidents CO amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law/historically low lab numbers Connecticut positive amphetamine workplace tests: +35.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Connecticut State Law: Less strict than Federal 

standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Connecticut, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, did 

not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect 

September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Connecticut. It also means 

that Connecticut does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

CT 0.10% 0.07% 0.14% 0.17% 0.20% 0.17% 0.23% 35.23% 

Connecticut Data Roundup: 

Since January of 2000, Connecticut has only reported five methamphetamine laboratory incident 

seizures. Workplace drug testing results showed 35.2% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, 

measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

3 

4 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.4% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law CT meth lab incidents CT amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
n/a (see Data Round-up) Delaware positive amphetamine workplace tests: +7.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Delaware State Law: Similar to Federal 

standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: October 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 100%* 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day sales limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Delaware’s state methamphetamine law took effect on October 1st, 2005. Delaware’s 

precursor restrictions are barely stricter than the CMEA, although most standards in Delaware are 

identical to the CMEA. Functionally, the CMEA standard applies in Delaware. 

There is a 30-day sales limit of 9 grams in Delaware – the same as the CMEA. State law does not contain 

a daily sales limit, so the CMEA’s 3.6 gram limit applies. State law contains an identification and logbook 

requirement. 

What makes Delaware barely stricter than the CMEA standard is the fact that although Delaware law 

does not expressly limit the sales of products containing these chemicals to pharmacies, the identification 

must be checked by a licensed pharmacist, sales clerk, or pharmacy technician. Products containing 

pseudoephedrine or ephedrine must be kept behind a checkout counter, pharmacy counter, or locked 

storage container. The State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor 

chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those 

chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

DE 0.19% 0.29% 0.24% 0.35% 0.40% 0.42% 0.45% 7.47% 

Delaware Data Roundup: 

In Delaware, only four methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures have been reported to DEA over 

the last few years. None of these have occurred since the State law was implemented on October 1st

, 

2005. Workplace drug testing results showed a 7.5% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, 

measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law DE meth lab incidents DE amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
22% decline in meth lab incidents Florida positive amphetamine workplace tests: -.06% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Florida State Law: Less Strict than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 22% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? all single-entity 

Daily sales limits: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Florida’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect July 1st 2005. The Florida Law is 

less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA is the controlling standard in Florida. 

Florida’s law limits sales of products containing only ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or 

phenylpropanolamine (meaning, single-ingredient but not multi-active products) to 9 grams or 3 

packages. It also requires these products to be kept behind store counters. Florida law does not contain 

an identification or logbook requirement (although the Federal CMEA has now imposed this standard 

nationwide). 

Florida does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

FL 0.12% 0.14% 0.15% 0.18% 0.18% 0.24% 0.24% -0.61% 

Florida Data Roundup: 

In Florida, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by about 22% after the State law was 

made effective on July 1st, 2005, with 173 incidents reported to DEA for the period from July 1st, 2005, to 

April 30th, 2006, compared to 221 incidents over the same period one year earlier. Workplace drug testing 

results showed a 0.6% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 

2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law FL meth lab incidents FL amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
43% decline in meth lab incidents Georgia positive amphetamine workplace tests: -25.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Georgia State Law: Less Strict than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 43% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals single-entity PSE only 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Georgia’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on July 1, 2005.The Georgia Law 

is less strict than the CMEA, making CMEA the applicable standard in Georgia. 

Georgia’s law applies only to products containing pseudoephedrine (not those containing ephedrine or 

phenylpropanolamine), and imposes a three package or nine gram limit – less strict than the CMEA. Like 

the CMEA, the state law requires that the products be placed behind the counter or in a locked cabinet. 

There was no identification or logbook requirement in Georgia prior to the passage of the CMEA. Georgia 

does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine 

to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the 

State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

GA 0.19% 0.26% 0.43% 0.57% 0.64% 0.75% 0.56% -25.54% 

Georgia Data Roundup: 

In Georgia, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined 43% after the State implemented its 

methamphetamine precursor control law, with 155 incidents reported to DEA for the period from July 1st, 

2005, to April 30th, 2006, compared to 273 incidents reported in the same period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 25.5% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.9% 

1.0% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law GA meth lab incidents GA amph positive rate 

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
n/a (see Data Round-up) Hawaii positive amphetamine workplace tests:-37.9% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Hawaii State Law: Less Strict than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 5, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? PSE only 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Hawaii’s methamphetamine precursor legislation went into effect in two stages: on July 5th, 

2006 and October 1st, 2006. The law is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA is the 

controlling standard in Hawaii. 

On July 5th, 2006, Hawaii’s law imposed a three package or nine gram sales limit. The law only applied to 

products containing pseudoephedrine, and required that these products be kept behind store counters, 

under video surveillance, or in the direct line of sight of a sales employee. The law that went into effect on 

October 1st was functionally the same as the CMEA (which also went into effect on October 1st), so 

Hawaii generally became a state in which the CMEA is the operating standard. 

Hawaii does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

HI 0.95% 1.47% 1.27% 1.36% 1.00% 1.15% 0.71% -37.87% 

Hawaii Data Roundup: 

Over the past four years, there have been 37 methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures reported in 

Hawaii. Although the State has faced a serious methamphetamine drug threat, law enforcement reports 

indicate that much of the methamphetamine consumed in the State comes from outside the State, as 

opposed to from methamphetamine laboratories located within the State. Since July 2005, there have 

only been two incidents reported to the DEA regarding laboratory seizures in Hawaii. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 37.9% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.5% 

1.0% 

1.5% 

2.0% 

2.5% 

3.0% 

3.5% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law HI meth lab incidents HI amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
meth lab incident data not yet available Idaho positive amphetamine workplace tests: -34.8% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Idaho State Law: Less Strict than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: March 3rd, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: unavailable 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? PSE 

Transaction limit: 9 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Idaho’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on March 30th 2006.The Idaho Law 

is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the nationwide CMEA standard is controlling in Idaho in most 

respects. 

Under Idaho state law, products containing pseudoephedrine must be put in a locked display case or 

behind a counter, and the purchaser must show identification. Additionally, sales are limited to 9 grams 

per customer (this is both a daily and monthly limit). However, as noted, the CMEA’s standard is stricter, 

and is controlling in Idaho. 

Prior to the CMEA’s enactment date, there was no ID and logbook requirement in Idaho. The State does 

not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to 

pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the 

State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

ID 0.53% 0.47% 0.50% 0.58% 0.63% 0.62% 0.41% -34.81% 

Idaho Data Roundup: 

Idaho’s methamphetamine precursor control law was effective on March 30th, 2006, and is therefore too 

new to measure any impact. However, methamphetamine laboratory incidents have generally been on a 

downward trend since an apparent peak in early 2003. Workplace drug testing results showed a 34.8% 

decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the 

same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law ID meth lab incidents ID amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
17% decline in meth lab incidents Illinois positive amphetamine workplace tests: +15.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Illinois State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: January 15, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: 17% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? * see below 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg 

30-day purchase limit: 7.5 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items in 

bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Illinois’ methamphetamine precursor legislation took effect January 15th, 2006. The law is 

stricter than the CMEA, although not wholly pharmacy-only. 

Illinois law imposes a 7.5 gram limit on sales of products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine 

(compared to the federal CMEA standard, which is 9 grams). The daily limit is one convenience package 

(defined as containing 3.6 grams or less of pseudoephedrine or ephedrine, identical to the CMEA 

standard). All products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine are designated as Schedule V drugs, 

and this limits sales of these products to pharmacies or other authorized entities under the Illinois 

Controlled Substances Act, which includes some non-pharmacy retail establishments. Illinois state law, 

like the CMEA, contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

IL 0.12% 0.15% 0.16% 0.18% 0.23% 0.22% 0.25% 15.17% 

Illinois Data Roundup: 

In Illinois, methamphetamine laboratory incidents declined by 17% after the State’s methamphetamine 

precursor control law went into effect on January 15, 2006, with 345 incidents reported to DEA for the 

period from January 15, 2006 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 416 incidents reported in the same period 

one year earlier. Workplace drug testing results showed a 15.1% increase in positive tests for 

amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law IL meth lab incidents IL amph positive rate 

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
28% decline in meth lab incidents Indiana positive amphetamine workplace tests: -8.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Indiana State Law: Similar to the Federal 

standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 28% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 3 g 

7-day purchase limit: 3 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Indiana’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on July 1st, 2005. Indiana’s law is 

similar to the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA standard is controlling in Indiana in most respects. 

Indiana’s law applies to products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine. There is a limit of three 

grams per purchase; there is also a limit of three grams purchase per week, which is apparently less strict 

than the CMEA’s 9-gram limit per month. Like the CMEA, state law imposes an identification and logbook 

requirement. 

Fundamentally, the CMEA is the functional standard in Indiana. The State does not limit sales of products 

containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not 

classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

IN 0.21% 0.30% 0.33% 0.40% 0.42% 0.44% 0.41% -8.50% 

Indiana Data Roundup: 

In Indiana, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 28% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 669 seizures from July 

1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 934 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 8.5% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months 

in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law IN meth lab incidents IN amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
70% decline in meth lab incidents Iowa positive amphetamine workplace tests: -31.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Iowa State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 74% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 1 pkg/360 mg 

30-day purchase limit: 7.5 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Iowa’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on May 21st, 2005. Iowa’s law is one 

of the strictest in the nation, and is stricter than the CMEA. 

Iowa’s law classifies products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine or phenylpropanolamine as 

Schedule V drugs, and limits sales of these products to pharmacies. (Products containing less than 120 

milligrams of pseudoephedrine are exempt.) There is a 7.5 gram monthly limit on these products and a 

daily limit of one package within 24 hours. Iowa law contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

IA 0.27% 0.80% 0.73% 0.63% 0.59% 0.61% 0.42% -31.10% 

Iowa Data Roundup: 

In Iowa, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 70% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 350 seizures from May 

21st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 1154 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 31.1% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law IA meth lab incidents IA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
54% decline in meth lab incidents Kansas positive amphetamine workplace tests: -15.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Kansas State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: June 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 54% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limits: * see below 

30-day purchase limit: * see below 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Kansas’s methamphetamine precursor law went fully into effect on June 1st, 2005 (some 

provisions became effective on April 28, 2005). Kansas law is one of the strictest in the nation, and is 

stricter than the CMEA. 

Kansas’s law classifies products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine – except those in liquid or 

gelatin capsule form – as Schedule V drugs. These products may only be sold at pharmacies, and must 

be stored behind pharmacy counters. Like the CMEA, Kansas law contains an identification and logbook 

requirement. In Kansas, no more than 24 dosage units may be sold to the same purchaser in a 48 hour 

period, and no more than four packages may be sold per customer per seven days. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

KS 0.31% 0.42% 0.39% 0.46% 0.41% 0.78% 0.66% -15.16% 

Kansas Data Roundup: 

In Kansas, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 54% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 215 seizures from June 

1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 470 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 15.1% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law KS meth lab incidents KS amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
43% decline in meth lab incidents Kentucky positive amphetamine workplace tests: -22.3% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Kentucky State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: June 20, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 43% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 3 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Kentucky’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect June 20th, 2005. Kentucky’s law 

is stricter than the CMEA, and basically imposes a pharmacy-only standard. 

Kentucky’s law applies to all products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine. 

There are sales limits of 3 grams per transaction and 9 grams per month, similar to the CMEA. Kentucky 

limits sales of these products to stores where the products can be sold by a pharmacist, pharmacist 

technician or intern, and requires that the products be kept behind a pharmacy counter or in a locked 

case. Like the Federal CMEA, Kentucky state law contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

KY 0.21% 0.20% 0.28% 0.31% 0.37% 0.36% 0.28% -22.35% 

Kentucky Data Roundup: 

In Kentucky, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 43% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 304 seizures from June 

20th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 535 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 22.3% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law KY meth lab incidents KY amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
85%* decline in meth lab incidents Louisiana positive amphetamine workplace tests: +0.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Louisiana State Law: Less strict than the 

Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: August 15, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 88% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Louisiana’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on August 15th, 2005. 

Louisiana’s law is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the federal CMEA standard is controlling in the 

State. 

Louisiana’s law applies to all products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine. There is a somewhat 

complicated system under state law involving differing sales limits for pharmacies and non-pharmacies, 

but these were largely rendered irrelevant by the Federal CMEA sales limits, which are stricter. Like the 

federal CMEA, there is an identification and logbook requirement. 

Louisiana does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

LA 0.16% 0.23% 0.24% 0.25% 0.46% 0.64% 0.65% 0.46% 

Louisiana Data Roundup: 

In Louisiana, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 85% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 16 seizures from July 

15th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 106 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a .5% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

* NOTE: Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in August of 2005, soon after the law went into effect. This 

most likely had a significant impact on the reduction in meth lab incidents and the number of workplace 

tests conducted. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.9% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law LA meth lab incidents LA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
data not yet available Maine positive amphetamine workplace tests: +39.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Maine State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: April 6, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: Not Available 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/3 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Maine’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on April 6th, 2006. Maine’s law is 

stricter than the CMEA in several respects. 

Maine’s law applies to all products containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or in solid form, or those in 

liquid form designated as precursors by state regulation. The state law limits sales to pharmacies, but 

unlike Oklahoma, does not require that the products be kept behind a counter. Rather, most products 

may be kept in a locked location or an area not accessible by the public. The law requires dispensation 

only by a licensed pharmacist or an employee under the supervision of a pharmacist. The state law’s 

monthly limit is the same as the federal CMEA’s limit – 9 grams. 

Maine’s state law does not classify products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine as Schedule V 

drugs. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

ME 0.05% 0.00% 0.04% 0.20% 0.13% 0.22% 0.31% 39.41% 

Maine Data Roundup: 

Maine’s methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect on April 6th, 2006, and is therefore too 

new to measure any impact. However, there have only been 16 methamphetamine laboratory incident 

seizures reported to the DEA since January 2000 from Maine. Workplace drug testing results showed a 

39.4% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to 

the same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

3 

4 

4 

5 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law ME meth lab incidents ME amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law/historically low lab numbers Maryland positive amphetamine workplace tests: +33.9% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Maryland State Law: No state law, only CMEA 

applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Maryland, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, did not 

implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect September 

30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Maryland. It also means that Maryland 

does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like pseudoephedrine to 

pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the State’s scheduling 

scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MD 0.09% 0.12% 0.18% 0.17% 0.22% 0.20% 0.26% 33.96% 

Maryland Data Roundup: 

Maryland did not implement a methamphetamine precursor control law at the State level. However, since 

January of 2000, Maryland has only reported less than ten methamphetamine lab incidents. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 33.9% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

QUEST A

MPHETA

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law MD meth lab incidents 

MD amph positive rate 

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law/historically low lab numbers Massachusetts positive amphetamine workplace tests: -16.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Massachusetts State Law: No State law, only 

CMEA applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Massachusetts, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, 

did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect 

September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Massachusetts. It also 

means that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MA 0.16% 0.18% 0.12% 0.16% 0.24% 0.33% 0.27% -16.26% 

Massachusetts Data Roundup: 

Massachusetts did not implement a methamphetamine precursor control law at the State level. However, 

since January of 2000, the State has only reported less than ten methamphetamine lab incidents. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 16.2% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law MA meth lab incidents 

MA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
16% decline in meth lab incidents Michigan positive amphetamine workplace tests: +73.3% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Michigan State Law: Similar to the Federal 

Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 20, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 16% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limits: 2 pkg 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Michigan’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in two stages: December 15th, 

2005, and July 17th, 2006. Michigan state law is approximately as strict as the CMEA, meaning that for 

most purposes, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Michigan. 

Most of the State provisions went into effect on December 15th, 2005. The law limited single sales of 

products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine to two packages or 48 capsules, which in most cases 

will probably be more restrictive than the Federal CMEA standard. Although the State law does not limit 

sales of the products to pharmacies, the law provides retailers with a somewhat complex list of options, 

including keeping the products behind the counter, in a locked cabinet, under video surveillance, or within 

20 feet of the counter with certain other requirements. Some of these requirements are less strict than the 

Federal CMEA and are thus obviated by the Federal law. Like the Federal CMEA, Michigan’s law 

contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Michigan does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State 

scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MI 0.08% 0.09% 0.18% 0.19% 0.19% 0.29% 0.51% 73.26% 

Michigan Data Roundup: 

In Michigan, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 16% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 224 seizures from July 

20th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 267 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 73.3% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law MI meth lab incidents MI amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
70% decline in meth lab incidents Minnesota positive amphetamine workplace tests: -4.9% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Minnesota State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: June 3, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 70% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 6 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Minnesota’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect June 3rd, 2005. Minnesota’s law 

is stricter than the CMEA. 

Most products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine can only be sold at a pharmacy, and must be 

kept behind the pharmacy counter. There is a 2 package or 6 gram limit on daily purchases, which is less 

strict than the CMEA, but there is a 6 gram monthly purchase limit, which is stricter than the CMEA. State 

law also contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MN 0.25% 0.42% 0.40% 0.38% 0.48% 0.59% 0.56% -4.90% 

Minnesota Data Roundup: 

In Minnesota, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 70% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 42 seizures from June 

3rd, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 138 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 4.9% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months 

in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law MN meth lab incidents MN amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
68%* decline in meth lab incidents Mississippi positive amphetamine workplace tests: -51.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Mississippi State Law: Less strict than the 

Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 68% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Mississippi’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect July 1st, 2005. The Mississippi 

law is not quite as strict as the CMEA, so the CMEA is the controlling standard in Mississippi. 

Mississippi’s law places a 9 gram monthly limit on purchases of products containing pseudoephedrine or 

ephedrine. The daily purchase limit is 6 grams. The law requires that products containing only 

pseudoephedrine or ephedrine be placed behind the counter or in a locked cabinet. Multi-active products 

-- meaning, products containing one of those chemicals as well as other active ingredients – may also be 

placed under video surveillance or kept within 30 feet of the store’s cashiers. There is an ID and logbook 

requirement in Mississippi. 

Mississippi does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MS 0.09% 0.24% 0.25% 0.45% 0.25% 0.55% 0.27% -51.40% 

Mississippi Data Roundup: 

In Mississippi, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 68% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 80 seizures from July 

1st

, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 253 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 51.4% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

* NOTE: Hurricane Katrina hit Mississippi in August of 2005, soon after the law went into effect. This most 

likely was a significant factor in the reduction in meth lab incidents. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law MS meth lab incidents MS amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
45% decline in meth lab incidents Missouri positive amphetamine workplace tests: -27.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Missouri State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 15, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 45% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limits: n/a 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Missouri’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect July 15th, 2005. The Missouri law 

is stricter than the CMEA in many important respects. 

Missouri’s law applies to both single-entity and multi-active products containing pseudoephedrine or 

ephedrine, and imposes a 9 gram monthly purchase limit – the same as the Federal CMEA’s monthly 

purchase limit. 

The State’s scheduling scheme is somewhat complicated. Generally, single-entity ephedrine products are 

classified as Schedule IV. Single-entity pseudoephedrine products, and multi-active products containing 

either pseudoephedrine or ephedrine are classified as Schedule V products, and may only be sold by a 

registered pharmacist or pharmacy technician. These products must be kept behind the pharmacy 

counter, and purchasers must show identification and sign a logbook. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MO 0.38% 0.49% 0.43% 0.33% 0.51% 0.59% 0.43% -27.10% 

Missouri Data Roundup: 

In Missouri, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 45% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 1,325 seizures from 

July 15th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 2,418 over the same time period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 27.1% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

300 

350 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law MO meth lab incidents MO amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
68% decline in meth lab incidents Montana positive amphetamine workplace tests: -69.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Montana State Law: Stricter than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 68% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Mostly 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limit: -

30-day sales limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Montana’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect July 1st 2005.The Montana law is 

stricter than the CMEA in several important respects. 

Montana’s law applies to single-entity and multi-active products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine 

(except for products in liquid or gelatin capsule form), and imposes a sales limit of nine grams in a 30-day 

period. The law limits sales of products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine to pharmacies, except 

in counties without a pharmacy; in these counties, the Montana Department of Justice may certify retail 

establishments to sell the products, subject to the same requirements on product placement, sales limits, 

and the like. In any case, the products must be kept behind pharmacy or store counters. There is an 

identification and logbook requirement in Montana. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

MT 0.00% 0.39% 0.11% 0.41% 0.44% 0.90% 0.27% -69.49% 

Montana Data Roundup: 

In Montana, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 68% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 17 seizures from July 

1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 53 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 69.4% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

14 

16 

18 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.5% 

1.0% 

1.5% 

2.0% 

2.5% 

3.0% 

3.5% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law MT meth lab incidents MT amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
85% decline in meth lab incidents Nebraska positive amphetamine workplace tests: -24.9% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Nebraska State Law: Stricter than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: September 1st, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 85% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Daily sales limits: 1.44 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? ID only 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Nebraska’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect September 1st, 2005.The 

Nebraska Law is stricter in some respects than the CMEA. 

Nebraska’s law applies to single-entity and multi-active products containing pseudoephedrine, and 

imposes a 24-hour purchase limit of 1.44 grams. State law requires that products containing the 

chemicals be kept behind a store counter or in a locked cabinet. The customer must show identification, 

but there is no logbook requirement under the State law (although the presence of this requirement under 

the Federal CMEA means that the logbook requirement does exist in Nebraska, as in the rest of the 

nation). The State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NE 0.30% 0.44% 0.41% 0.36% 0.38% 0.73% 0.55% -24.86% 

Nebraska Data Roundup: 

In Nebraska, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 85% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 35 seizures from 

September 1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 241 over the same time period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 24.9% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law NE meth lab incidents NE amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law Nevada positive amphetamine workplace tests: -30.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Nevada State Law: No state law, only CMEA 

applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Nevada did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth 

Act took effect September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Nevada. It 

also means that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NV 0.72% 0.97% 0.71% 0.75% 1.00% 0.99% 0.69% -30.48% 

Nevada Data Roundup: 

Nevada did not implement any methamphetamine precursor control legislation before the CMEA went 

into effect on September 30th, 2006. However, methamphetamine laboratory incidents look to be on a 

declining trend since peaking in 2003 and early 2004. Workplace drug testing results showed a 30.4% 

decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the 

same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

1.6% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law NV meth lab incidents NV amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law/historical low lab numbers New Hampshire positive amphetamine workplace tests: +25.3% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

New Hampshire State Law: No State Law, only 

CMEA applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: New Hampshire, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, 

did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect 

September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in New Hampshire. It also 

means that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NH 0.14% 0.20% 0.18% 0.30% 0.34% 0.36% 0.45% 25.25% 

New Hampshire Data Roundup: 

New Hampshire did not implement any state-level methamphetamine precursor control legislation prior to 

the CMEA’s effective date of September 30th, 2006. In the last four years, the State has reported just 

eleven methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures to the DEA. Workplace drug testing results 

showed a 25.3% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, 

compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.9% 

1.0% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law NH meth lab incidents NH amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
data not yet available New Jersey positive amphetamine workplace tests: -2.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

New Jersey State Law: Less strict than Federal 

standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: November 24, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: New Jersey’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect November 23rd, 2005. The 

New Jersey law is less strict in most respects than the CMEA. 

New Jersey’s law simply imposes a single-transaction sales limit of three packages or nine grams of 

products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or (both single-entity and multi-active products). 

Although the State law does not require that the products be kept behind a store counter or in a locked 

cabinet, imposes no limit on monthly purchases, and contains no requirement as to purchasers showing 

identification or signing a logbook, these provisions are required nationwide under the Federal CMEA. 

New Jersey does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NJ 0.09% 0.13% 0.15% 0.15% 0.14% 0.22% 0.21% -2.18% 

New Jersey Data Roundup: 

New Jersey has enjoyed relatively low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, reporting just 

five to the DEA in the past four years. As such, there is insufficient data to measure the impact of New 

Jersey’s methamphetamine precursor control law. Workplace drug testing results showed a 2.2% 

decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the 

same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law NJ meth lab incidents NJ amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
51% decline in meth lab incidents New Mexico positive amphetamine workplace tests: -60.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

New Mexico State Law: Stricter than Federal 

standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: 51% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? PSE 

Daily sales limits: *see below 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: New Mexico’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in several stages: January 

15th, 2005; September 30th, 2005, and July 1st 2006. Existing New Mexico law is stricter than the CMEA in 

several important respects. 

As of July 1st, 2006, New Mexico’s law classifies all products containing pseudoephedrine, except those 

in liquid form, as Schedule V drugs. The sales limits mirror Federal requirements, with a 3.6 gram daily 

limit and 9 gram monthly limit. Products containing pseudoephedrine may be sold only at pharmacies and 

by a licensed pharmacist, pharmacy intern, or pharmacy technician. The law requires that purchasers 

show identification and sign a logbook. 

Prior to July 1st, 2006, the law was less restrictive, allowing sales at non-pharmacy retail stores, and 

imposing a somewhat complex system of requirements on product placement (for example, requiring 

products containing pseudoephedrine to be kept no more than 20 feet from a checkout counter or in a 

locked case accessible only by an employee, with different provisions for single-entity and multi-active 

pseudoephedrine products). 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NM 0.42% 0.38% 0.51% 0.52% 0.76% 0.92% 0.36% -60.47% 

New Mexico Data Roundup: 

In New Mexico, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 51% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law (the first iteration) went into effect, with the State reporting 59 

seizures from January 15th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 120 over the same time period one year 

earlier. The most recent iteration was effective on July 1st, 2006, and is too recent to measure. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 60.5% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law NM meth lab incidents NM amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law New York positive amphetamine workplace tests: +3.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

New York State Law: No State Law, only 

CMEA applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: New York did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat 

Meth Act took effect September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in New 

York. It also means that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine 

precursors like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V 

drugs under the State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NY 0.06% 0.07% 0.07% 0.10% 0.11% 0.13% 0.13% 3.22% 

New York Data Roundup: 

New York did not enact any significant methamphetamine precursor control legislation prior to the 

implementation of the Federal CMEA. Over the last four years, the State has reported 118 laboratory 

incident seizures to the DEA. Workplace drug testing results showed a 3.2% increase in positive tests for 

amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law NY meth lab incidents NY amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
27% decline in meth lab incidents North Carolina positive amphetamine workplace tests: -11.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

North Carolina State Law: Stricter than the 

Federal Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: January 15, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: 27% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: North Carolina’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in two stages: January 15th, 

2006, and August 3rd, 2006. The North Carolina law is stricter than the CMEA. 

North Carolina’s law imposes sales limits similar to those in the CMEA, of 3.6 grams per day, and 9 

grams per month. (From January 15th until August 3rd, 2006, the purchase limits were 6 grams per day 

and 9 grams per month.) The current law applies to both single-entity and multi-active products containing 

pseudoephedrine or ephedrine. The law is somewhat unusual in that it references sales by retailers, but 

directly indicates that products containing pseudoephedrine may only be sold from, and kept behind, 

pharmacy counters. As a result, the law effectively imposes a pharmacy-only sales requirement on 

products containing pseudoephedrine, which is stricter than the Federal CMEA standard. These 

provisions were looser prior to August 3rd, 2006. There is an ID and logbook requirement in North 

Carolina. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

NC 0.10% 0.21% 0.24% 0.25% 0.28% 0.38% 0.34% -11.06% 

North Carolina Data Roundup: 

In North Carolina, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 27% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 109 seizures from 

January 15th, 2006 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 150 over the same time period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 11.1% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law NC meth lab incidents NC amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
80% decline in meth lab incidents North Dakota positive amphetamine workplace tests: -33.9% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

North Dakota State Law: Less strict than 

Federal Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: June 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 80% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 4 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: North Dakota’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect June 1st 2005. The North 

Dakota law is less strict than the CMEA in several important respects. 

North Dakota’s law limits transactions of products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine to two 

packages, each of which may not contain more than two grams of the chemical. The State law imposes 

an identification and logbook requirement. The State law contains a somewhat different scheme for 

product placement than the CMEA, allowing either video surveillance of the products, or placement 

behind the counter. The CMEA appears to be slightly stricter on this point than North Dakota law, thereby 

controlling product placement in North Dakota. North Dakota does not limit sales of products containing 

methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify 

products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

ND 0.12% 0.07% 0.08% 0.22% 0.26% 0.46% 0.30% -33.93% 

North Dakota Data Roundup: 

In North Dakota, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 80% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 49 seizures from June 

1st, 2005, to April 30th, 2006, compared to 248 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 33.9% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law ND meth lab incidents ND amph positive rate 

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
data not yet available Ohio positive amphetamine workplace tests: +5.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Ohio State Law: Less strict than Federal 

Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: February 9, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: unavailable 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? single-entity PSE only 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Ohio’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect May 17th, 2006.The Ohio Law is less 

strict than the CMEA in several important respects. 

Ohio’s law applies only to single-entity pseudoephedrine products. There is no daily sales/purchase limit 

under the State law, and there is a 9 gram monthly purchase limit, so the Federal CMEA’s 3.6 daily 

purchase limit and 9 gram monthly purchase limit are the effective standard in Ohio. While it does not 

explicitly direct the products to be kept behind a store counter, it does require that the products be placed 

in such a manner that purchase is not possible without assistance from a store or pharmacy employee. 

The law contains an identification and logbook requirement. Ohio does not limit sales of products 

containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not 

classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

OH 0.17% 0.15% 0.16% 0.21% 0.28% 0.34% 0.35% 5.43% 

Ohio Data Roundup: 

Because Ohio’s methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect in May 2006, the law is too 

recent to measure. Methamphetamine laboratory seizures in the State appear to have hit a peak in early 

2005, generally declining since that time. Workplace drug testing results showed a 5.4% increase in 

positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period 

one year earlier. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.5% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law OH meth lab incidents OH amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
85% decline in meth lab incidents Oklahoma positive amphetamine workplace tests: -10.7% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Oklahoma State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: April 6, 2004 

Meth lab reduction: 85% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? All PSE 

Daily sales limits: --

30-day sales limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Oklahoma’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect April 6th, 2004, and was 

updated effective November 1, 2005. The Oklahoma Law is one of the strictest in the Nation, and is 

stricter than the CMEA. The law was also the first of its kind in the Nation, and served as the model for 

many States that subsequently implemented methamphetamine precursor control laws. 

The Oklahoma law passed in April 20004 limited sales of sales of products containing pseudoephedrine 

(both single-entity and multi-active) to pharmacies, and requires that the products be placed behind the 

pharmacy counter. There is an identification and logbook requirement. The law places a 9 gram limit on 

monthly purchases. Oklahoma law also classifies products containing pseudoephedrine as Schedule V 

drugs. 

The November 2005 updates to the law did not notably change the overall thrust of the law, addressing 

how information is collected and processed pursuant to the identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

OK 0.59% 0.75% 0.57% 0.62% 0.60% 0.85% 0.76% -10.66% 

Oklahoma Data Roundup: 

In Oklahoma, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 66% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law first went into effect, with the State reporting 535 seizures from 

April 6, 2004, to October 30th, 2005, compared to 1572 over the same time period one year earlier. Then, 

after the second iteration of the law went into effect, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures 

declined by 85% (compared to the period when no law was in effect), with 129 laboratory incident 

seizures reported from November 1st, 2005, to August 2006, compared to 862 in the same period before 

any State law was in effect. Workplace drug testing results showed a 10.7% decrease in positive tests for 

amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law OK meth lab incidents OK amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
87% decline in meth lab incidents Oregon positive amphetamine workplace tests: -29.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Oregon State Law: Stricter than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Dates: 11/15/04 * 4/14/05 * 7/1/06 

Meth lab reduction: 41% 79% 87% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? n/a 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction sales limit: n/a 

Purchase limit: n/a 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Oregon’s methamphetamine precursor law is the strictest in the Nation. It went through three 

primary iterations. On November 15, 2004, the Oregon Board of Pharmacy implemented a rule requiring 

pseudoephedrine products, other than certain liquids and gel caps, be kept behind the counter and 

requiring photo identification. On May 14, 2005, a new rule went into effect requiring those 

pseudoephedrine products be kept behind the pharmacy counter and mandating photo identification and 

logbook entry for each sale. Finally, On July 1, 2006, a rule went into effect requiring a prescription for all 

products containing pseudoephedrine. 

Oregon is the only state that completely prohibits the possession or use of any product containing 

pseudoephedrine without a prescription, classifying pseudoephedrine as a Schedule III drug under 

Oregon’s controlled substance scheduling scheme. As such, products containing pseudoephedrine are, 

of course, only found behind pharmacy counters, as opposed to non-pharmacy retail outlets. Like other 

prescription drugs, identification is required, and as with all prescriptions, the transaction is recorded. 

Sales limits are not a relevant question, as the product is not sold over the counter. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

OR 0.48% 0.39% 0.49% 0.72% 0.66% 0.64% 0.46% -29.14% 

Oregon Data Roundup: 

During the first iteration of methamphetamine precursor control (November 2004 to May 2005), Oregon 

recorded a total of 168 methamphetamine laboratory incidents, a drop of 41% from the same seven 

months a year prior (284 methamphetamine laboratory incidents from November 2003 to May 2004). 

During the second iteration, from June 2005 to June 2006 inclusive, there were 107 methamphetamine 

laboratory incidents. This was a 79% reduction, compared to the thirteen months prior to the first 

restriction (502 methamphetamine laboratory incidents). For the three months that the current iteration of 

the rule has been in place (July 2006 to August 2006), there were 13 methamphetamine laboratory 

incidents, an 87% reduction from the 100 laboratories seen during the same months before any 

restrictions were implemented. 

(There is also an 87% 

reduction using data for the 

most recent six months – April 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law OR meth lab incidents OR amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 

through September 2006, 

during which there were 30 

methamphetamine 

laboratories, compared to April 

through September 2004, 

during which there were 240.) 

Workplace drug testing results 

showed a 29.1% decrease in 

positive tests for amphetamine, 

measuring the first five months 

in 2006, compared to the same 

period one year earlier. 
no state law Pennsylvania positive amphetamine workplace tests: +9.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Pennsylvania State Law: No state law, only 

CMEA applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Transaction limit: No 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Pennsylvania did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat 

Meth Act took effect September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in 

Pennsylvania. It also means that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine 

precursors like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V 

drugs under the State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

PA 0.13% 0.14% 0.17% 0.17% 0.20% 0.25% 0.27% 9.24% 

Pennsylvania Data Roundup: 

Pennsylvania did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act 

took effect September 30th 2006. In 2004 and 2005, Pennsylvania recorded fewer than 190 

methamphetamine laboratory incidents – often less than ten a month. Over the last four years, the State 

reported just over 300 methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures to the DEA. Workplace drug testing 

results showed a 9.2% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 

2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

14 

16 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.4% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law PA meth lab incidents PA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law 

positive amphetamine workplace tests: -24% 

Rhode Island 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Rhode Island State Law: No state law, only 

CMEA applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Rhode Island, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, did 

not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect 

September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Rhode Island. It also means 

that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

RI 0.30% 0.33% 0.44% 0.35% 0.37% 0.57% 0.43% -24.01% 

Rhode Island Data Roundup: 

Rhode Island, which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, did not 

implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect September 

30th 2006. In the last four years, the State has reported one laboratory incident to the DEA. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 24% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 
0 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law RI meth lab incidents RI amph positive rate 

Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
meth lab incident data not yet available South Carolina positive amphetamine workplace tests: -9.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

South Carolina State Law: Less Strict than 

Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: Nov 4th, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: unavailable 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: South Carolina’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on November 4th 2006. The 

South Carolina law is less strict than the CMEA in most respects. 

South Carolina’s law applies to single-entity and multi-active products containing pseudoephedrine or 

ephedrine. The law places a 9 gram limit on daily purchases, which is less strict than the Federal CMEA’s 

3.6 gram limit, and is thus largely irrelevant. There is an identification and logbook requirement in South 

Carolina. The State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals 

like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as 

Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

SC 0.23% 0.34% 0.33% 0.38% 0.43% 0.54% 0.49% -9.13% 

South Carolina Data Roundup: 

Methamphetamine laboratory incidents in South Carolina have generally been on a downward trend since 

April 2005. However, the new State law, like the Federal CMEA law, is too recent to measure its impact. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 9.1% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the 

first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law SC meth lab incidents SC amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
data not yet available South Dakota positive amphetamine workplace tests: +7.7% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

South Dakota Law: Less strict than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 1st, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? some 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction sales limit: 2 pkg 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: South Dakota’s methamphetamine precursor law, SB 207, went into effect July 1st, 2006. The 

South Dakota Law is slightly less strict than the CMEA. 

South Dakota’s law applies to both single-entity and multi-active products containing pseudoephedrine or 

ephedrine. The law requires these products to be kept behind a store counter, in a locked container, or 

anywhere in the store if an electronic anti-theft system is used. (This last provision is not allowed under 

the Federal CMEA, so this option is presumably not being utilized.) The current purchase limits 2 

packages daily or 9 grams monthly. South Dakota has an identification and logbook requirement. South 

Dakota does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

SD 0.22% 0.22% 0.26% 0.43% 0.29% 0.50% 0.53% 7.68% 

South Dakota Data Roundup: 

South Dakota’ methamphetamine precursor law went into effect on July 1st, 2006, and the law is too 

recent to measure its impact. In the last four years, 121 methamphetamine laboratory incidents were 

reported in South Dakota. Workplace drug testing results showed a 7.7% increase in positive tests for 

amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law SD meth lab incidents SD amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
56% decline in meth lab incidents Tennessee positive amphetamine workplace tests: +1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Tennessee State Law: Stricter than Federal 

Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: March 31, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 56% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: none 

30-day sales limit: 3 pkg/9g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Tennessee’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect March 31st 2005, and on April 

29, 2005. The Tennessee law is stricter than the CMEA. 

Tennessee’s law applies to any product (both single entity and multi-active) containing pseudoephedrine, 

ephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine, and limits sales of those products to pharmacies (as of March 31, 

2005). The law also requires that these products be kept behind pharmacy counters or in a locked 

container within view of and 25 feet of the counter, that the purchaser show identification and sign a 

logbook, and limits sales of the products to three packages or nine grams per transaction. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

TN 0.20% 0.20% 0.27% 0.29% 0.37% 0.40% 0.40% 0.98% 

Tennessee Data Roundup: 

In Tennessee, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 56% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 645 seizures from 

March 31st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 1461 over the same time period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 1% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the 

first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

180 

200 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law TN meth lab incidents TN amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
62% decline in meth lab incidents Texas positive amphetamine workplace tests: -14.8% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Texas State Law: Similar to the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: September 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 62% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? EPH, PSE 

Transaction sales limit: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Texas’ methamphetamine precursor law went into effect August 1st 2005. The Texas law is 

stricter in some respects that the CMEA, but less strict in others. 

Texas’ law applies to products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine. It does not expressly put a 

sales or purchase limit on these products, but instead indicates that authorized sellers must take 

“reasonable steps” to ensure that sales do not exceed 2 packages or 6 grams. (This is trumped in Texas 

by the Federal CMEA, which has a 3.6 gram purchase limit). Sales are limited to either pharmacies or any 

business authorized to sell the products by the Department of State Health Services, and products must 

be placed behind the counter or within 30 feet of the counter and within the direct line of sight of the 

employee monitoring the counter. Texas law contains an identification and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

TX 0.21% 0.28% 0.35% 0.38% 0.51% 0.61% 0.52% -14.79% 

Texas Data Roundup: 

In Texas, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 62% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 109 seizures from 

August 1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 285 over the same time period one year earlier. 

Workplace drug testing results showed a 14.8% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring 

the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law TX meth lab incidents TX amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
no state law Utah positive amphetamine workplace tests: -2.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Utah State Law: No state law, only CMEA 

applies 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: May 1, 2000 

Meth lab reduction: 10% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: 12 g 

30-day purchase limit: 12 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Other than a 12-gram limit on the possession of pseudoephedrine or ephedrine enacted in 

2000, Utah did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took 

effect September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in Utah. It also means 

that the State does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

UT 0.41% 0.35% 0.36% 0.51% 0.66% 0.62% 0.60% -2.43% 

Utah Data Roundup: 

Utah did not implement any state-level methamphetamine precursor control legislation, and it is 

premature to measure the impact of the CMEA in Utah. There was a 10% increase in amphetamine 

workplace positives from 2005 to 2006. Workplace drug testing results showed a 2.4% decrease in 

positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period 

one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

New state law UT meth lab incidents UT amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
data not yet available/historically low lab numbers Vermont positive amphetamine workplace tests: -79.5% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Vermont State Law: Similar to the Federal 

Standards 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: September 30, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: none 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Vermont’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect September 30th 2006 – the same 

day as the Federal CMEA. The Vermont Law is fairly similar to the CMEA, putting a daily sales limit of 3.6 

grams on products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine, and requiring that 

these products be kept behind store counters or in a locked case or cabinet. Although there is not an 

explicit identification and logbook requirement in the State law, the Federal CMEA contains one, and the 

State law directs the Department of Health to develop a brochure explaining, among other things, the 

importance of retailers keeping a logbook of purchases. Vermont does not limit sales of products 

containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not 

classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

VT 0.00% 0.51% 0.30% 0.20% 0.40% 0.63% 0.13% -79.51% 

Vermont Data Roundup: 

Vermont’s methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect on September 30th, 2006, so it is 

premature to measure the impact of the State’s law. Additionally, the State has historically enjoyed low 

levels of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, with only two incidents reported to the DEA over the last 

four years. Workplace drug testing results showed a 79.5% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, 

measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.5% 

1.0% 

1.5% 

2.0% 

2.5% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

No new state law VT meth lab incidents VT amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
76% decline in meth lab incidents Virginia positive amphetamine workplace tests: -16.4% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Virginia State Law: Similar to Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: August 30, 2006 

Meth lab reduction: 76% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: none 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Virginia’s methamphetamine precursor regulations went into effect October 1st, 2005. These 

were temporary, and by September 30th 2006, the State adopted provisions similar to the Federal CMEA. 

Virginia law does not restrict the sale of products containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or 

phenylpropanolamine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing these chemicals as 

Schedule V drugs. Until June 30th, 2006, products containing only pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or 

phenylpropanolamine (single-entity) had to be kept behind a store counter or in a locked container or 

case; products containing these chemicals in multi-active with other chemicals (multi-active products) had 

a slightly more lenient standard, allowing video surveillance or anti-theft devices as options. Now, with the 

Federal CMEA in effect (and Virginia law expressly adopting most of the CMEA), single-entity and multiactive products are treated the same. 

Until June 30th, 2006, there was a nine-gram retail transaction limit for these products. Now, Virginia law 

contains a 3.6 gram retail transaction limit, like the CMEA. Virginia law now also contains an identification 

and logbook requirement. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

VA 0.17% 0.20% 0.21% 0.26% 0.25% 0.40% 0.34% -16.43% 

Virginia Data Roundup: 

In Virginia, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 76% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor controls went into effect, with the State reporting 12 seizures from October 

1st, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 50 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 16.4% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law VA meth lab incidents VA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
Wa 71% decline in meth lab incidents shington positive amphetamine workplace tests: -10.2% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Washington State Law: Stricter than the 

Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: July 24, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 71% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Some 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 2 pkg/6 g 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Washington State’s’ methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in several stages. Most 

provisions went into effect on July 24th 2005. The sales limits went into effect on January 1, 2006. The 

Washington law is slightly stricter than the CMEA in several respects. 

Washington’s law limits sales of any product containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine or 

phenylpropanolamine to pharmacies or stores registered with the Washington State Department of 

Health. The law limits sales of these products to 3 grams or less within a single transaction or 24-hour 

period – slightly stricter than the federal 3.6 gram limit for single transactions. There is no monthly limit on 

purchases under the state law, although the Federal law limits it to 9 grams. There is an identification and 

logbook requirement. 

Washington law does not restrict the sale of products containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine to 

pharmacies, although it comes somewhat close by requiring that retailers register with the Department of 

Health in order to sell these products. Washington does not classify these products as Schedule V 

controlled substances. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

WA 0.47% 0.44% 0.42% 0.46% 0.53% 0.66% 0.60% -10.23% 

Washington Data Roundup: 

In Washington, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 71% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 193 seizures from July 

24th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 677 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 10.2% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.9% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law WA meth lab incidents WA amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
Wa No District law/historically low lab numbers shington, D.C. positive amphetamine workplace tests: +115.24% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Washington DC State Law: No Law in Place, 

CMEA Controls 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: None 

Meth lab reduction: n/a 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? No 

All listed chemicals? No 

Daily sales limits: None 

30-day purchase limit: None 

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Washington, D.C., which has enjoyed low numbers of methamphetamine laboratory incidents, 

did not implement any methamphetamine precursor controls before the Combat Meth Act took effect 

September 30th 2006. In other words, the CMEA is the controlling standard in the District of Columbia. It 

also means that the District does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursors like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify these products as Schedule V drugs under the 

State’s scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

DC 0.00% 0.11% 0.08% 0.13% 0.09% 0.09% 0.20% 115.24% 

Washington D.C. Data Roundup: 

The District of Columbia did not implement methamphetamine precursor control legislation prior to the 

effective date of the CMEA. Since January of 2000, Washington has reported just one methamphetamine 

laboratory incident seizure to the DEA. Workplace drug testing results showed a 115.2% increase in 

positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period 

one year earlier. 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

QUEST A

MPHET

A

MINE POSITIVE R

ATE 

No new state law DC meth lab incidents DC amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
We 54% decline in meth lab incidents st Virginia positive amphetamine workplace tests: -34.8% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

West Virginia State Law: Different from the 

Federal Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: August 5, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 54% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Some 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? single-entity only 

Daily sales limits: --

30-day purchase limit: 3 pkg/9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: West Virginia’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect July 8th, 2005.The West 

Virginia law is stricter than the CMEA in that it limits sales of products containing pseudoephedrine, 

ephedrine or phenylpropanolamine to pharmacies, but less strict in that it does not apply to multi-active 

products (products that contain these chemicals in addition to other active ingredients). 

West Virginia’s law classifies products containing only pseudoephedrine or ephedrine as Schedule V 

controlled substances. This limits the sale of these products to pharmacies, and requires placement of 

these products behind pharmacy counters. There is a 9 gram limit on monthly purchases and a 

requirement that the purchaser show identification and sign a logbook, as with the Federal CMEA 

standard. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

WV 0.11% 0.30% 0.20% 0.21% 0.29% 0.50% 0.33% -34.82% 

West Virginia Data Roundup: 

In West Virginia, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 54% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 88 seizures from July 

8th, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 193 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace drug 

testing results showed a 34.8% decrease in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

0.9% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law WV meth lab incidents WV amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
Wis 26% decline in meth lab incidents consin positive amphetamine workplace tests: +31.1% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Wisconsin State Law: Stricter than the Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: June 22, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: 26% 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? Yes 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? PSE 

Sales limit: 4 oz/48 hrs 

30-day purchase limit: 7.5 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes “Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Wisconsin’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect in two stages: Most provisions 

went into effect on June 22nd 2005. The provisions that classify products containing pseudoephedrine as 

a Schedule V controlled substance under the State’s scheduling scheme went into effect on October 1, 

2005. 

The Wisconsin law is stricter than the CMEA. Other than those products in liquid and gelatin form, any 

product containing pseudoephedrine may be sold only at pharmacies and by a pharmacist. There is a 7.5 

gram 30-day purchase limit, which is moderately stricter than the CMEA 9-gram limit. Purchasers must 

present photo identification and the pharmacist must record the information. Interestingly, Wisconsin’s law 

does not appear to directly require placement behind a counter or in a locked container, but because the 

products are classified as a Schedule V controlled substance, the practical effect is to require placement 

behind pharmacy counters. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

WI 0.18% 0.25% 0.26% 0.33% 0.35% 0.42% 0.55% 31.11% 

Wisconsin Data Roundup: 

In Wisconsin, methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures declined by 26% after the State’s 

methamphetamine precursor control law went into effect, with the State reporting 39 seizures from June 

22nd, 2005 to April 30th, 2006, compared to 53 over the same time period one year earlier. Workplace 

drug testing results showed a 31.1% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, measuring the first five 

months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

14 

16 

18 

20 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.1% 

0.2% 

0.3% 

0.4% 

0.5% 

0.6% 

0.7% 

0.8% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law WI meth lab incidents WI amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates 
Wyoming data not yet available 

positive amphetamine workplace tests: +6.0% 

Federal Standard: The United States Combat 

Methamphetamine Act 

Wyoming State Law: Less strict than Federal 

Standard 

Effective Dates: 4/8/2006 

9/30/2006 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Daily sales limits: 3.6 g 

30-day purchase limit: 9 g 

Identification/logbook requirement? Yes 

Effective Date: August 1, 2005 

Meth lab reduction: data not yet available 

Sales locations limited to pharmacies? No 

Behind the counter/locked cabinet? Yes 

All listed chemicals? Yes 

Transaction limit: 2 pkg 

30-day purchase limit: --

Identification/logbook requirement? No 

“Listed chemicals” means any product containing ephedrine (EPH), pseudoephedrine (PSE), or phenylpropanolamine (PPA). Items 

in bold indicate the controlling standard in the state. Items in italics indicate that the provision is trumped by a stricter standard. 

Summary: Wyoming’s methamphetamine precursor law went into effect August 1st 2005.The Wyoming 

law is less strict than the CMEA, meaning that the CMEA standards are controlling in Wyoming in most 

respects. 

Wyoming’s law applies to products containing only pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, or 

phenylpropanolamine, and limits sales of these products to 6 grams per transaction. This, of course, is 

trumped by the Federal CMEA’s 3.6 gram standard. State law also requires the products be placed in a 

secure area (behind a counter, in a locked case, or in the direct line of sight of an employee, et cetera). 

However, this provision also appears less strict than the CMEA, so the CMEA is controlling. Wyoming law 

does not contain an identification or logbook requirement, although it is required by the CMEA in 

Wyoming and all other states. 

Wyoming does not limit sales of products containing methamphetamine precursor chemicals like 

pseudoephedrine to pharmacies, and does not classify products containing those chemicals as Schedule 

V drugs under the State scheduling scheme. 

Sta te 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2000 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2001 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitive s, 2002 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Positives, 2003 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2004 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Amp h 

Po sitive s, 2005 

(Jan-May) 

Quest Am p h 

Po sitives, 2006 

(Ja n-Ma y) 

% Change 

2005-2006 

WY 0.14% 0.09% 0.43% 0.44% 0.43% 0.68% 0.72% 5.98% 

Wyoming Data Roundup: 

In Wyoming, there were about 111 methamphetamine laboratory incident seizures reported to the DEA 

over the last four years. Although no laboratory incident seizures have been reported since the law went 

into effect, it is unclear whether this is due to reporting trends or an actual absence of methamphetamine 

laboratories. Workplace drug testing results showed a 6% increase in positive tests for amphetamine, 

measuring the first five months in 2006, compared to the same period one year earlier. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

Jan-00

May-00

Sep-00

Jan-01

May-01

Sep-01

Jan-02

May-02

Sep-02

Jan-03

May-03

Sep-03

Jan-04

May-04

Sep-04

Jan-05

May-05

Sep-05

Jan-06

May-06 

# OF METH INCIDENTS 

0.0% 

0.2% 

0.4% 

0.6% 

0.8% 

1.0% 

1.2% 

1.4% 

1.6% 

1.8% 

2.0% 

QUEST AMPHETAMINE POSITIVE RATE 

New state law WY meth lab incidents WY amph positive rate Meth Incidents vs. Workplace Positive Rates