Nevada HIDTA 

ANNUAL REPORT 

2005 
NEVADA HIDTA ANNUAL REPORT 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I. Executive Summary - - - - - - - - 4

II. Introduction - - - - - - - - 6

III. National HIDTA Goals - - - - - - - - 8

IV. Summary of Treat Assessment for Budget Year 2005 - - - - - - - - 9

V. Strategy Summary - - - - - - - - 10

VI. Performance Measures - - - - - - - - 11

A. Performance Measures for Goal 1 - - - - - - - - 11

1. Core Table 1 – Cost per DTO Disrupted by Year - - - - - - - - 11

2. Core Table 2 – Percentage of DTOs Disrupted or 

Dismantled by Scope, 2005 

- - - - - - - - 11

3. Core Table 3 – Percentage of Money Laundering 

Organizations Disrupted or Dismantled by 

Scope, 2005 

- - - - - - - - 12

4. Core Table 4 – Operational Scope of all DTO 

Cases Initiated, 2005 

- - - - - - - - 12

5. Core Table 5 – Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005 - - - - - - - - 12

6. Core Table 6 – Return on Investment (ROI) for 

Drugs Removed from the Marketplace by Law 

Enforcement Initiatives, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 13

7. Core Table 7 – Return on Investment (ROI) for 

Assets Removed from the Marketplace by Law 

Enforcement Initiatives, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 13

8. Core Table 8 – Total Return on Investment (ROI) 

for Drugs and Assets Removed from the Marketplace by Law Enforcement Initiatives, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 13

9. Core Table 9 – Prosecution Initiative Cost Per 

Investigation, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 14

2
10. Core Table 10 – Value of Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs Dismantled in 2005, by Size 

- - - - - - - - 14

11. Core Table 11 – Clandestine Laboratory Activities, 2005 - - - - - - - - 15

B. Performance Measures for Goal 2 - - - - - - - - 15

1. Core Table 12 – Training Efficiency by Year and 

Type of Training 

- - - - - - - - 15

2. Core Table 13 – Percentage of HIDTA Initiatives 

Using Event and Case De-confliction 

- - - - - - - - 15

3. Core Table 14 – Percentage of Event and Case 

De-conflictions Submitted, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 16

4. Core Table 15 – Percentage of Investigations 

Provided Analytical Support, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 16

5. Core Table 16 – Percentage of Initiative Investigations Referred to Other HIDTAs and Other 

Agencies, by Year 

- - - - - - - - 16

VII. Conclusions - - - - - - - - 17

VIII. Appendices - - - - - - - - 19

IX. List of Tables and Charts - - - - - - - - 26

X. Reference Sources - - - - - - - - 26

Las Vegas Strip at Sunset

3
I. Executive Summary 

Drug trafficking facilitates global terrorism and international criminal activity ranging from homicide

to fraud. Moreover, drug trafficking proceeds often fund insurgencies and promote governmental 

instability through the corruptive force of greed that is synonymous with the trade. The ultimate 

benefactors of drug trafficking are among the most notorious mass murderers the world has ever 

known, but the lure of money and the existence of ambivalent populations across the globe will 

continue to secure the existence of this threat indefinitely. 

The United States continues to battle the drug epidemic on international and domestic fronts with 

programs ranging from eradication and interdiction to treatment and prevention. While the country’s commitment toward combating the threat has been steady, the reality of the problem remains 

unwavering as well. Drug trafficking organizations continuously adapt to counter-drug measures in 

order to create, maintain and advance their wealth and power. The persistence of this vicious cycle 

would not be possible; however, if the international demand for illegal drugs such as marijuana, 

cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine did not exist. The demand problem is particularly tenacious 

in the United States, which continues to be the number one consumer nation for illegal drugs. According to the most recent State Department Narcotics report, U.S. demand led to 20,000 deaths 

resulting from drug abuse during 2005. 

From a law enforcement perspective, federal, state and local agencies across the nation have 

been engaged in a battle against drug trafficking for several decades. While there have been 

many successes, policy makers have recognized some deficiencies as well. Over time, law enforcement officials and elected leaders concluded that the multitude of departments and agencies 

fighting the drug war would benefit through the existence of a neutral body that shared common 

goals, promoted law enforcement coordination and the exchange of information. This recognition 

led to the creation of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the High Intensity 

Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program. 

After the formation of the ONDCP and the establishment of the first five HIDTAs in 1990, the nation 

entered into a new era in a decades old battle against illegal drugs. The primary objective was to 

provide federal, state and local law enforcement entities with a mechanism to reduce drug trafficking through intelligence driven task forces, thereby reducing the impact of illicit drugs throughout 

the country. The success and popularity of the HIDTA program has led to the creation of 23 additional HIDTAs, including Nevada in 2001. 

As outlined in the 2004 Nevada HIDTA drug threat assessment, Nevada’s primary drug threat, 

methamphetamine, is no longer the result of local production. Methamphetamine production and 

laboratory seizures have decreased dramatically since 2001. Several factors have contributed to 

this decline to include: increased availability and competitive prices of high purity “ice” produced 

and smuggled by Mexican traffickers into Southern Nevada; and state legislation in conjunction 

with law enforcement efforts to target, arrest and prosecute regional methamphetamine laboratory 

operators. 

Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) are the primary source of supply for methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana and heroin destined for and transiting through the Nevada HIDTA region. 

Additionally, violent street gangs with affiliations to street gangs in the Los Angeles area are active 

in the retail distribution of drugs in the Las Vegas area. 

To counter these threats, the seven Nevada HIDTA enforcement Initiatives focus on the disruption 

and/or dismantlement of drug trafficking organizations, methamphetamine manufacturers/distributors, and criminal street gangs. The Initiatives utilize the resources of the Investigative 

Support Center (ISC) to identify, gather, evaluate, analyze and disseminate drug intelligence in4
formation. The Initiatives also utilize the resources of the Los Angeles County Regional Criminal 

Information Clearinghouse (LA CLEAR) to provide event and case de-confliction. 

Beginning in 2004, the national HIDTA program designed and implemented a performance management business model that showcases HIDTA accountability. The model is data-driven and consequently shifts the HIDTA program from annual illustrations of specific initiatives to measuring 

change over time. For example, the HIDTA enforcement budget for 2004 totaled approximately 

$177 million. Upon comparing the HIDTA enforcement budget against its achievements, over $11 

billion in drug and asset removals, HIDTA enforcement generated $63 in drug and asset removal 

for each dollar spent toward that goal. 

Each HIDTA is required to produce data, ranging from “Cost per DTO Disrupted” to “Percentage of 

Event and Case De-conflictions”, in order to fulfill sixteen separate data requirements. Though the 

process for determining the HIDTA program’s effectiveness has evolved, specific objectives such 

as promoting information exchange, attacking regional drug trafficking organizations and removing 

illegal drugs from the marketplace remain as cornerstones of the HIDTA program. During 2005, the 

Nevada HIDTA has produced some of the following results: 

• The disruption or dismantlement of 48% of the 62 DTOs targeted 

• The removal of over $12 million of illegal drugs from the marketplace 

• The removal of over $10 million of DTO assets 

• Over 10,000 case and event de-conflictions through LA CLEAR 

• ISC intelligence support to 79 HIDTA cases 

5
II. Introduction 

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 and the ONDCP Reauthorization Act of 1998 authorized the Director of The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to designate areas within the United 

States which exhibit serious drug trafficking problems and harmfully impact other areas of the 

country as High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA). The HIDTA Program provides additional 

federal resources to those areas to help eliminate or reduce drug trafficking and its harmful consequences. Law enforcement organizations within HIDTAs assess drug trafficking problems and design specific initiatives to reduce or eliminate the production, manufacture, transportation, distribution and chronic use of illegal drugs and money laundering. 

The HIDTA Program improves the effectiveness and efficiency of drug control efforts by facilitating 

cooperation, among agencies with similar missions, through resource and information sharing. 

HIDTA often facilitates this process through co-location with one or more participating agencies 

and from the establishment and funding of multi-agency task forces. 

National HIDTA Program 

Mission Statement 

The mission of the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) Program is to disrupt the market for illegal drugs in the United States by assisting federal, state, and local law enforcement 

entities participating in the HIDTA program to dismantle and disrupt drug trafficking organizations, with particular emphasis on drug trafficking regions that have harmful effects on other 

parts of the United States.

Each HIDTA is governed by its own Executive Board that is comprised of federal, state and local 

law enforcement officials. These Boards facilitate interagency drug control efforts to eliminate or 

reduce drug threats. The Executive Boards ensure that threat specific strategies and initiatives are 

developed, employed, supported and evaluated. HIDTA-designated counties comprise of approximately 13 percent of U.S. counties; they are present in 43 states, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia. The most recently designated HIDTA’s are the North Florida 

HIDTA and the Nevada HIDTA, both designated in 2001. 

Since its designation in 2001, the Nevada HIDTA 

has continuously striven to achieve the objective of 

the National HIDTA Program Mission Statement. 

The economic foundations that exist within the Nevada HIDTA region have a direct impact on the regional drug trafficking threat. The high-dollar tourist

population and adjacent night life that surround the 

Las Vegas ‘strip’ also attract drug traffickers to 

supply illicit stimulants and diverted pharmaceuticals. Economic growth in Las Vegas, specifically 

within the service and construction industries, has 

been accompanied by a rise in undocumented 

workers from Mexico and Mexican drug trafficking 

organizations with ties to Southern California and Arizona. 

Luxor Hotel Casino 

In order to meet the specific threats of the Nevada HIDTA region, the Executive Board has formulated the following Mission statement: 

6
Nevada HIDTA Mission Statement

 Measurably reduce drug trafficking through Intelligence driven task forces, 

 thereby reducing the impact of illicit drugs in this and other areas of the country. 

The specific goals of this HIDTA are to: 

 Reduce drug availability by disrupting/dismantling drug trafficking organizations. 

 Measurably reduce methamphetamine manufacturing and distribution. 

 Reduce the harmful consequences of drug trafficking. 

 Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement organizations and their 

efforts. 

 Measurably reduce drug-related crime. 

 Establish a multi-agency drug intelligence network within the HIDTA region. 

Reporting Period: This Annual Report covers the reporting period January 1, 2005 to December 

31, 2005. 

Budget Allocation: During this reporting period, ONDCP allocated a $1,900,000 budget for the operations of the Nevada HIDTA, with $1,316,920 allocated for the seven enforcement Initiatives. 

Geographic Area of Responsibility: The Nevada 

HIDTA’s primary area of concern is Clark 

County, Nevada, which is located in the 

southern most part of the state. The cities 

within Clark County are Las Vegas, North Las 

Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City, Mesquite and 

several unincorporated areas. The county 

encompasses 8,060 square miles and is 

bordered by California and Arizona. 

Over the last five years, population growth in 

Clark County has been among the highest in 

the country. Regional population has risen from 

approximately 853,000 in 1990 to over 1.7 million today. The most substantial demographic 

growth has occurred within the Hispanic community, which now accounts for approximately 

24% of the total population. Employment opportunities in the service industry, gaming, as well 

as commercial and residential construction, are 

very appealing to undocumented workers 

primarily from Mexico. 

What portion of Clark County’s Hispanic 

population is comprised of undocumented immigrants is unknown; however, best estimates indicate the state of Nevada’s labor force included 100,000 – 150,000 undocumented workers by the 

end of 2004. This estimate equates to roughly 10% of Nevada’s job base and places Nevada second in the nation only to Arizona, which is also a border state of Nevada. Another Nevada border 

state, California, is ranked third in the nation under this category. 

7
White

69%

11%

10%

4% 6% Hispanic

Furthermore, the preceding figures do not account for the millions of travelers who visit Clark 

County each year. For calendar year 2005, the Nevada HIDTA region was the destination for more 

than 35 million tourists. 

III. National HIDTA Goals 

The Office of National Drug Control Policy, in establishing the HIDTA program, has developed a 

process for each HIDTA program to follow. The process includes some of the following elements: 

• Continual assessment of the regional drug threat 

• Formulation of strategies to target and combat the identified threat 

• Development and funding of initiatives to implement these strategies 

• Facilitate coordination between federal, state and local efforts to improve the effectiveness 

and efficiency of drug control efforts and to reduce or eliminate the harmful impact of drug 

trafficking 

In order to standardize national goals for individual HIDTAs to incorporate into regional strategies, 

ONDCP and HIDTA policy makers have formulated two specific goals for the entire program. 

These national HIDTA program goals, as well as summaries of the Nevada HIDTA’s 2005 Threat 

Assessment and Strategy, are provided in the following sections. In conjunction with the national 

objectives, the Nevada HIDTA has developed a strategy to maximize the HIDTA’s impact on the 

regional drug market. 

NATIONAL HIDTA GOALS 

Goal 1: Disrupt the market for illegal drugs by dismantling or disrupting 

drug trafficking and/or money laundering organizations; and 

Goal 2: Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of HIDTA initiatives. 

These goals present the Nevada HIDTA with a foundation to develop and implement plans for present and future HIDTA objectives, and they are the basis for all performance planning and progress measurements. As the Nevada HIDTA prepares its annual budget, each Initiative will present programs and fiscal allocations based on these national goals. Each Initiative will provide explanation and supporting data to the following: 

1990

Black

Asian/Pac

Other

2003

Clark County Demographic Trends 1990-2003 

9%

7% 6%

23% 55%

Supplemental Table 1 

8
• Establishment of performance measures 

• Impact of expenditures in support of performance measures 

IV. Summary of Threat Assessment for Budget Year 2005 

The following summary is also reported under the “Key Findings” section of the 2005 Nevada 

HIDTA Threat Assessment.

1999 2001 2003 2005

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures

Utah Nevada Arizona California

avh

• Las Vegas is one of the fastest 

growing cities in the nation; the 

influx of population to the city 

primarily has been from Southern California and has included 

members of violent, drugtrafficking, California street 

gangs, who continue in their 

drug activities and violent beh

ior in the Las Vegas and Nort

Las Vegas areas. 

• Las Vegas has developed into a 

regional distribution center and a 

transshipment location for major 

drugs of abuse, including 

methamphetamine, cocaine, 

marijuana, heroin and MDMA.

• Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and criminal groups are the dominant transporters and wholesale distributors of illicit drugs into, through, and from the Las Vegas area. 

• Methamphetamine poses the most significant threat in Las Vegas and the Clark County 

area.

• Mexican traffickers are smuggling increasing amounts of “ice” methamphetamine from Mexico to the Las Vegas area, which is becoming a hub for wholesale and retail distribution of 

this more potent crystalline form of the drug. 

• Methamphetamine production and laboratory seizures have decreased dramatically

since 2001. Several factors have contributed to this decline: increased availability 

and competitive prices of high purity “ice” 

methamphetamine smuggled by Mexican 

drug traffickers to the Las Vegas area; and 

Nevada State anti-methamphetamine legislation and law enforcement efforts to target 

and prosecute local methamphetamine 

producers.

Entrance to the Forum Shops, Caesar’s Palace

9
• Street gangs are instrumental in retail distribution of illicit drugs in the Las Vegas area. 

Much of the violent and property crime in the city can be attributed to street gang activities, 

including drug trafficking. Many Las Vegas area gangs are linked to Los Angeles gangs and 

their network of influence and drug suppliers. 

• Drug traffickers primarily use bulk transportation of currency via private and commercial vehicles to move illicit proceeds. Some proceeds typically are smuggled directly to Mexico, 

largely due to Las Vegas’ proximity to the border. 

• Casinos in Las Vegas provide drug traffickers with potential money laundering opportunities; however, the degree to which drug traffickers attempt to move proceeds through the 

casinos is unknown. Federal reporting requirements have increased the level of oversight in 

this area, making it more difficult to launder significant amounts of currency through the casino and gaming industries. 

 

 

I. HIDTA Strategy Summary 

 

The Nevada HIDTA Initiatives focus on the disruption and/or dismantlement of drug trafficking organizations involved in the trafficking and distribution of methamphetamine, cocaine, MDMA, marijuana and heroin. Additionally, Nevada HIDTA Initiatives target criminal street gangs in order to 

disrupt and dismantle their transportation, distribution, communication and money laundering enterprises. 

The Initiatives utilize the resources of the Investigative Support Center (ISC) to target, collect, analyze, document and disseminate intelligence related to DTOs and specific drug threats. This allows 

the ISC to fulfill its HIDTA mandated mission of providing case support and strategic intelligence 

that is comprehensive, relevant and often proactive. 

The Initiatives also utilize the resources of the Los Angeles County Regional Criminal Information 

Clearinghouse (LA CLEAR) to provide event and case de-confliction. The ability to de-conflict on a 

regional scale maximizes officer safety and minimizes duplication of investigative effort. 

Through the combined efforts of the seven enforcement Initiatives and the Investigative Support 

Center, the Nevada HIDTA expects to produce the following “Outputs” for 2005: 

1. Disrupt or dismantle four (4) local/regional DTOs 

2. Disrupt or dismantle two (2) national/international DTOs 

3. Arrest, prosecute and convict one hundred fifty (150) drug traffickers 

4. Process the names of 150 subjects through the ISC 

5. Monitor and change as necessary the HIDTA policy/procedure manual 

6. Attain 5 new developmental standards in order to achieve 80% compliance 

VI. HIDTA Performance Measures 

Since the establishment of the Nevada HIDTA in 2001, the Executive Board has emphasized the 

goal of disrupting the more significant drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) active in the region. 

Consistent with the elements that characterize the Nevada HIDTA region, many of the organizations identified during 2005 are cells of more extensive international and regional DTOs. By targeting the largest DTOs, and more specifically the methamphetamine DTOs, for either disruption or 

10
dismantlement, the Nevada HIDTA should achieve maximum impact on both the regional and national drug market. 

A. Performance Measures for Goal 1

Disrupt the market for illegal drugs by dismantling or disrupting drug trafficking and/or money laundering organizations. 

 

Table 1 - HIDTA Law Enforcement Initiatives for 2005 at Nevada HIDTA 

% of Tar- % of Tar- DTOs Iden- Total Tar- Year # Disrupted # Dismantled tified geted geted Dis- geted Disrupted mantled 

Begin 2005 40 35 13 37% 7 20% 

During 2005 29 27 8 30% 2 7% 

Total 2005 69 62 21 34% 9 15% 

Table 2 - HIDTA DTOs Disrupted or Dismantled, for 2005, at Nevada HIDTA [ALL DTOs; MLOs] 

Scope # Identified 

# Targeted # Disrupted 

% of Targeted 

Disrupted

# Dismantled

% of Targeted 

Dismantled 

Total Disrupted or 

Dismantled 

Total % 

Disrupted 

or Dismantled 

International 23 22 6 27% 6 27% 12 55% 

Multi-state 16 15 3 20% 0 0% 3 20% 

Local 30 25 12 48% 3 12% 15 60% 

Total 69 62 21 34% 9 15% 30 48% 

Tables 1 & 2 indicate that the Nevada HIDTA continues to make progress toward achieving goal 

number 1 of the national HIDTA program. Several of the categories outpace 2004 totals and surpass 2005 targets. Overall, the Nevada HIDTA disrupted or dismantled almost half of all DTOs targeted for the year. 

11
Table 3 - HIDTA Money Laundering Organizations Disrupted or Dismantled, for 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Table 4 - HIDTA Operational Scope, 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Scope # CPOT 

Cases 

# RPOT 

Cases 

# OCDETF 

Cases 

% OCDETF of 

Total Cases 

International 4 1 4 80% 

Multi-state 0 3 0 0% 

Local 1 0 2 18% 

Total 5 4 6 38% 

 . 

Scope # Identified 

MLOs # Targeted 

% of Tar- % of Tar- Total Dis- Total % Dis-

# Disrupted geted Dis- # Dismantled

rupted 

geted Dismantled rupted or rupted or 

Dismantled Dismantled 

International 0 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 

Multi-state 1 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 

Local 2 2 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 

Total 3 3 0 0% 1 33% 1 33% 

Table 5 - Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Amount Seized (kg Drug Seized (kg or D.U.) Wholesale Value or D.U.) 

Heroin kg 0.014 $350.00 

Cocaine HCL kg 385.575 $6,361,988 

Crack Cocaine kg 1.985 $35,730 

Marijuana kg 0 $0.00 

Marijuana plants and grows 0 $0.00 

Methamphetamine kg 13.663 $285,557 

Methamphetamine ice kg 66.883 $2,023,211 

Ecstasy (MDMA)(D.U.s) 20,520.075 $328,321 

Cannabis 1128.276 $1,365,214 

Marijuana (indoor) 275.000 $2,571,250 

Other 0 $0.00 

Other 0 $0.00 

Other 0 $0.00 

Total Wholesale Value $12,971,620 

12
Table 6—Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs Removed from the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget 

Baseline 

Drug Wholesale Value 

Drug Whole- Actual Targeted sale Value Drug Drug ROI Removed ROI From Market 

2004 $1,391,715 $10,081,487 N/A $10,081,487 $7 

2005 $1,560,052 $10,081,487 $7 $12,971,620 $8 

2006 

2007 

 

The statistics illustrated in Table 6 demonstrate an increase of Return on Investment (ROI) for the 

Nevada HIDTA during 2005. While funding for the Nevada HIDTA remains at the bottom of the 

national HIDTA budget range, this minimum investment has resulted in a high volume of drugs removed from the Nevada market. Additionally, several seizures occurred as a result of highway interdiction efforts which serve to disrupt other regional DTOs and markets across the country. 

Table 7—Return on Investment (ROI) for Assets Removed from 

 the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget 

Baseline 

Value of Drug 

Assets 

Value of Drug Actual Targeted Assets Re- Asset Asset ROI moved From ROI Market 

2004 $1,391,715 $3,682,174 $3 $3,682,174 $3 

2005 $1,560,052 $3,682,174 $3 $10,008,143 $6 

2006 

2007 

Table 8—Total ROI for Drugs and Assets Removed 

 from the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget Drugs and Assets Baseline 

Drugs and Actual Targeted Assets Re- Total Total ROI moved From ROI Market 

2004 $1,391,715 $13,763,661 N/A $13,763,661 $10 

2005 $1,560,052 $13,763,661 $10 $22,979,763 $14 

2006 

2007 

The fourteen to one dollar ratio illustrated in table 8 is a considerable ROI for the Nevada HIDTA, 

and it surpassed the baseline established during 2004 by 40%. As the Nevada HIDTA continues 

to develop and evolve, the above ROI should sustain itself or reach higher ratios during future 

years of operation. 

13
Table 9—Prosecution Initiative Cost Per Investigation, 2005 

Investiga- Investiga- Cost/ In- Investigations % Han- Year Budget tions Baseline 

tions Pro- vestigajected Handled dled tion 

2004 $0 0 0 0 

2005 

2006 

2007 

 Note: The Nevada HIDTA does not currently have a Prosecution Initiative. 

Table 10—Value of Clandestine Methamphetamine 

Labs Dismantled in 2005, by Size 

Meth Cost Per Ounce $550 

Lab Size Labs ID/Targeted 

Labs Value of 

Disman- Labs Distled mantled 

A. Less 2 1 1 $1,100 Oz 

B. 2 - 8 4 4 $11,000 Oz 

C. 9 Oz - 0 0 $0 16 Oz 

D. 32 - 0 0 $0 144 Oz 

E. 160 - 0 0 $0 320 Oz 

Total 5 5 $12,100 

Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs 

Dismantled in Clark County (by all 

agencies) in 2005

4

3 1

14

A. Less 2 Oz B. 2 - 8 Oz C. 9 Oz - 1 Lb

D. 2 - 9 Lbs E. 10 - 20 Lbs F. Over 20 Lbs

14
15

Note: No data reported for CY2005 

Reference the methamphetamine laboratory seizure chart on page 7, lab seizures have continually 

decreased since the turn of the century. Effective legislation and law enforcement plus the rise in 

Mexican produced methamphetamine all contribute toward the decline. 

B. Performance Measures for Goal 2 

3⁄4 Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of HIDTA initiatives. 

 

Table 12—HIDTA Training Efficiency by Year and Type of Training 

# Students 

Expected 

for Training 

# Students 

Actually 

Trained 

# Training 

Hours Actually Provided Total Training 

Cost 

Training Cost per 

Hour 

Type of Training 

2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005

% 

Change 

2004-

2005 

Analytical/ 

Computer 4 7 23 96 1,728 $5,433 $9,173 $57 $5 -91% 

Investigative/ 

Interdiction 30 39 202 963 2,049 $39,408 $20,014 $41 $10 -76% 

Management/ 

Administrative 3 10 1 112 17 $11,707 $1,057 $105 $62 -41% 

Other:_______ 

Total 37 0 56 226 1,171 3,794 $56,548 $30,244 $48 $8 -83% 

Table 13—Percentage of HIDTA Initiatives Using Event 

and Case De-confliction Services, by Year.

Year 

Total 

HIDTA 

Initiatives

# Initiatives Targeted to 

Use Services 

# Initiatives 

Using 

% Initiatives 

Using 

2004 10 7 7 70% 

2005 10 7 7 70% 

2006 

2007 

Table 11—HIDTA Clandestine Laboratory Activities, 2005 

 Baseline # Targeted 

# Identified % Identified 

Actual 

Change 

from 

Baseline 

Suspicious Precursor/Essential 

Chemical Transactions* 

 0 

Laboratory Dump 

Sites 0 

Chemical/Glassware 

Seizures 0 
Table 14—Percentage of Event and Case De-conflictions Submitted, by Year.

Year 

Baseline # 

Deconflictions 

Submitted 

# Deconfliction 

Submissions Targeted 

# 

# Event De- Case/Subject Total De- % Deconflictions 

Submitted 

Deconflictions 

Submitted 

conflictions conflictions 

Submitted Submitted 

2004 7500 2883 6228 9111 121% 

2005 9111 9383 3675 7215 10,890 116% 

 

Since its inception in 2001, the Nevada HIDTA has been a signatory with the Los Angeles Clearinghouse (LA CLEAR) for event and case/subject de-confliction. LA CLEAR provides a 24 hour deconfliction service, and its proficiency in this area is supported by the Nevada HIDTA’s rising level 

of participation. The data in table 14 is also a reflection of Nevada’s emphasis on de-confliction and 

is highlighted by increases in all data categories. 

Table 15—Percentage of Investigations Provided 

Analytical Support, by Year.

Year 

# Investi- Baseline # # Investi- gations Investigations gations % Targeted Targeted Receiving 

Analytical 

Support 

for Analytical 

Support 

Provided Investigations 

Analytical Supported 

Support 

2004 3 5 167% 

2005 5 35 79 225% 

2006 

2007 

Analytical support data for 2005 is a reflection of both greater HIDTA task force utilization of the 

ISC and ISC improvements in accounting for that utilization. The data from the preceding table, as 

well as the chart below, indicates that the rise in requests for case support has been symbiotic with 

an overall increase in requests received by the ISC. 

2005 ISC Activity

72

87

30

7 8 1 3 9

GTF DTF SNJMTF MDTO MLAR FIST ITF OTHER

16
Table 16—Percentage of HIDTA Initiative Investigations Referred 

 to Other HIDTAs and Other Agencies, by Year.

Year 

Total 

HIDTA Initiative Investigations 

# Initiative 

Investigations 

Targeted for 

Referral 

# HIDTA # HIDTA 

Initiative Initiative % Targeted Investigations Referred to 

Other HIDTAs 

Investiga- Total Initiative Initiative In- tions Re- Investigations vestigations ferred to Referred Referred Other 

Agencies 

2004 207 40 48 17 65 163% 

2005 260 67 37 66 103 153% 

2006 0 

2007 0 

The idea of information sharing within the HIDTA program includes the consistent willingness 

among participating agencies to refer investigations to other HIDTAs and law enforcement agencies. The above table reflects the Nevada HIDTA’s commitment to this concept and contribution 

toward fulfilling goals 1 & 2 of the national HIDTA program. 

Nevada HIDTA (FIST Initiative) Cost per fugitive arrested in 2005 

 

# ReFugitives 

Identified 

ferred to % Tar- % of Tar- Cost per # Tar- # Ar- other Budget 

HIDTA or 

USMS TF 

geted geted of 

Identified rested geted Fugitive Arrested Arrested 

2004 453 30 423 93% 279 66% $50,189 $180 

2005 673 0 586 87% 371 63% $50,189 $135 

2006 

2007 

Supplemental Table 5 

The Nevada HIDTA Fugitive Investigative Strike Team (FIST) targets point five of the Nevada 

HIDTA mission statement by measurably reducing drug-related crime. FIST has surpassed its 

2004 totals in fugitives identified, targeted and arrested while significantly increasing its overall efficiency (cost per fugitive arrested). 

VII. Conclusions 

The drug trade spreads through societies like a cancer, attacking individuals, families and institutions through addiction, violence and corruption. The business of drug trafficking has proven to be 

very resilient and successful by relying on the basic economic principles of supply and demand. 

Even though the United States and many other countries have responded with creative and sustained counter-drug measures, the drug trafficking organizations maintain a resource advantage 

that allows them to remain on the offensive. 

Consequently, law enforcement and policy makers have recognized the need for a coherent drug 

strategy that maximizes limited resources. Within that strategy is the HIDTA program, whose main 

objectives include impacting the illegal drug market by dismantling or disrupting drug trafficking and 

money laundering organizations. 

17
The Nevada HIDTA has proven to be a productive part of the national HIDTA strategy by reducing 

regional drug trafficking through the use of intelligence driven task forces. This is exemplified by 

the fact that Nevada HIDTA task forces utilized LA CLEAR for over 10,000 case and event deconflictions during 2005. It is further illustrated through the increasing utilization of the Investigative 

Support Center (ISC). During 2005, Nevada HIDTA task forces requested ISC intelligence support 

for 79 separate investigations. 

The Nevada HIDTA affected the regional drug market by removing large quantities of drugs and 

assets and by disrupting or dismantling numerous drug trafficking organizations. During 2005, Nevada HIDTA task forces seized over $22 million in drugs and assets. Additionally, Nevada HIDTA 

task forces disrupted or dismantled 48% of all DTOs and MLOs targeted for the year. 

The Nevada HIDTA disrupted the flow of methamphetamine into the region by implementing a 

comprehensive strategy that includes single mission Initiatives such as the Accelerated Domestic 

Market Disruption Initiative or ADMD and the Southern Nevada Joint Methamphetamine Task 

Force (SNJMTF). In the true spirit of the HIDTA concept, the ADMD Initiative addressed Nevada’s 

primary drug threat by targeting mid-level traffickers with a coordinated, inter-agency effort that resulted in 35 arrests and the seizure of 11 pounds of methamphetamine. Meanwhile, the SNJMTF 

dismantled 75% of targeted Mexican methamphetamine trafficking organizations throughout the 

year. 

As supported by the above examples, the Nevada HIDTA continues to make significant contributions toward national HIDTA program objectives. Moreover, many of Nevada’s results meet or surpass targeted goals for the year. These results are highlighted by increases in DTOs identified and 

disrupted, drugs and assets removed, total de-conflictions and intelligence support provided. As 

emerging threats are identified and new levels of achievement are recorded during the years 

ahead, the Nevada HIDTA will continue to adapt through effective application of the HIDTA performance measurement process. 

18
VII. Appendices 

A. NEVADA HIDTA ORGANIZATIONAL CHART - 2005

OFFICE OF NATIONAL 

DRUG CONTROL POLICY 

II. ONDCP

 TASK FORCE 

INITIATIVES 

NEVADA HIDTA 

EXECUTIVE BOARD

NEVADA HIDTA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION 

INITIATIVE

INVESTIGATIVE 

SUPPORT CENTER 

TRAINING 

INITIATIVE

INTELLIGENCE 

FUNCTION 

SUPPORT 

FUNCTION

MONEY 

LAUNDERING

TASK FORCE 

MAJOR DRUG 

ORGANIZATION 

TASK FORCE 

INTERDICTION 

TASK FORCE 

DRUG TASK 

FORCE 

METHAMPHETAMINE 

TASK FORCE 

FUGITIVE

INVESTIGATIONS GANG TASK 

FORCE STRIKE TEAM 

April 2006

B. 2005 Nevada HIDTA Executive Board. 

Stephen C. Delgado, SAC, Drug Enforcement Administration, Chairperson 

Bill Young, Sheriff, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Vice Chairperson 

Paul J. Vido, SAC, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 

Ellen B. Knowlton, SAC, Federal Bureau of Investigation 

Loraine Brown, SAC, Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

J. Wesley Eddy, SAC, Internal Revenue Service 

Daniel Bogden, United States Attorney 

19
Fidencio Rivera, Acting United States Marshal 

Alan Kerstein, Chief, Henderson Police Department 

Mark Paresi, Chief, North Las Vegas Police Department 

Philip Brown, Chief, Nevada Department of Public Safety 

David Roger, Clark County District Attorney 

Kim LaBrie, Lt. Colonel, Nevada National Guard 

C. Nevada HIDTA Participating Agencies 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) 

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 

Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 

U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) 

United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) 

Nevada Department of Public Safety (DPS) 

Nevada Gaming Control Board (GCB) 

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) 

North Las Vegas Police Department (NLVPD) 

Henderson Police Department (HPD) 

Clark County District Attorney’s Office (CCDA) 

Nevada National Guard (NNG) 

D. List of counties participating in the Nevada HIDTA

Clark County, Nevada 

E. Nevada HIDTA PMP Matrix for year of Annual Report 

Table 1 - HIDTA Law Enforcement Initiatives for 2005 at Nevada HIDTA 

% of Tar- % of Tar- DTOs Iden- Total Tar- Year # Disrupted # Dismantled tified geted geted Dis- geted Disrupted mantled 

Begin 2005 40 35 13 37% 7 20% 

During 2005 29 27 8 30% 2 7% 

Total 2005 69 62 21 34% 9 15% 

Table 2 - HIDTA DTOs Disrupted or Dismantled, for 2005, at Nevada HIDTA [ALL DTOs; MLOs] 

Scope # Identified 

# Targeted # Disrupted 

% of Targeted 

Disrupted

# Dismantled

% of Targeted 

Dismantled 

Total Disrupted or 

Dismantled 

Total % 

Disrupted 

or Dismantled 

International 23 22 6 27% 6 27% 12 55% 

Multi-state 16 15 3 20% 0 0% 3 20% 

Local 30 25 12 48% 3 12% 15 60% 

Total 69 62 21 34% 9 15% 30 48% 

20
Table 3 - HIDTA Money Laundering Organizations Disrupted or Dismantled, for 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Table 4 - HIDTA Operational Scope, 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Scope 

# CPOT 

Cases 

# RPOT 

Cases 

# OCDETF 

Cases 

% OCDETF of 

Total Cases 

International 4 1 4 80% 

Multi-state 0 3 0 0% 

Local 1 0 2 18% 

Total 5 4 6 38% 

Table 5 - Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005, at Nevada HIDTA 

Drug Seized (kg or D.U.) Amount Seized (kg 

or D.U.) Wholesale Value 

Heroin kg 0.014 $350.00 

Cocaine HCL kg 385.575 $6,361,988 

Crack Cocaine kg 1.985 $35,730 

Marijuana kg 0 $0.00 

Marijuana plants and grows 0 $0.00 

Methamphetamine kg 13.663 $285,557 

Methamphetamine ice kg 66.883 $2,023,211 

Ecstasy(MDMA)(D.U.s) 20,520.075 $328,321 

Cannabis 1128.276 $1,365,214 

Marijuana (indoor) 275.000 $2,571,250 

Other 0 $0.00 

Other 0 $0.00 

Other 0 $0.00 

Total Wholesale Value $12,971,620 

Scope # Identified 

MLOs # Targeted 

% of Tar- % of Tar- Total Dis- Total % Dis-

# Disrupted geted Dis- # Dismantled

rupted 

geted Dismantled rupted or rupted or 

Dismantled Dismantled 

International 0 0 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 

Multi-state 1 1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 

Local 2 2 0 0% 1 50% 1 50% 

Total 3 3 0 0% 1 33% 1 33% 

21
22

Table 6—Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs Removed from the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget 

Baseline 

Drug Wholesale Value 

Targeted 

Drug ROI 

Drug Wholesale Value 

Removed 

From Market 

Actual 

Drug 

ROI 

2004 $1,391,715 $10,081,487 N/A $10,081,487 $7 

2005 $1,560,052 $10,081,487 $7 $12,971,620 $8 

2006 

2007 

Table 7—Return on Investment (ROI) for Assets Removed from 

 the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget 

Baseline 

Value of Drug 

Assets 

Targeted 

Asset ROI 

Value of Drug 

Assets Removed From 

Market 

Actual 

Asset 

ROI 

2004 $1,391,715 $3,682,174 $3 $3,682,174 $3 

2005 $1,560,052 $3,682,174 $3 $10,008,143 $6 

2006 

2007 

Table 8—Total ROI for Drugs and Assets Removed 

 from the Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005. 

Year Budget Drugs and Assets Baseline 

Targeted 

Total ROI 

Drugs and 

Assets Removed From 

Market 

Actual 

Total 

ROI 

2004 $1,391,715 $13,763,661 N/A $13,763,661 $10 

2005 $1,560,052 $13,763,661 $10 $22,979,763 $14 

2006 

2007 

Core TABLE 9: Prosecution Initiative Cost per Investigation, by Year 

Nevada HIDTA Cost per Investigation by Year 

Year Budget Investigations 

Baseline 

Investigations 

Projected 

Investigations 

Handled 

% Handled Cost/ Investigation 

2004 $0 0 0 0 

2005 

2006 

2007 
23

Table 10—Value of Clandestine Methamphetamine 

Labs Dismantled in 2005, by Size 

Meth Cost Per Ounce $550 

Lab Size Labs ID/Targeted 

Labs 

Dismantled 

Value of 

Labs Dismantled 

A. Less 2 

Oz 1 1 $1,100 

B. 2 - 8 

Oz 4 4 $11,000 

C. 9 Oz - 

16 Oz 0 0 $0 

D. 32 - 

144 Oz 0 0 $0 

E. 160 - 

320 Oz 0 0 $0 

Total 5 5 $12,100 

Table 12—HIDTA Training Efficiency by Year and Type of Training 

# Students 

Expected 

for Training 

# Students 

Actually 

Trained 

# Training 

Hours Actually Provided Total Training 

Cost 

Training Cost per 

Hour 

Type of Training 

2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005

% 

Change 

2004-

2005 

Analytical/ 

Computer 4 7 23 96 1,728 $5,433 $9,173 $57 $5 -91% 

Investigative/ 

Interdiction 30 39 202 963 2,049 $39,408 $20,014 $41 $10 -76% 

Management/ 

Administrative 3 10 1 112 17 $11,707 $1,057 $105 $62 -41% 

Other:_______ 

Total 37 0 56 226 1,171 3,794 $56,548 $30,244 $48 $8 -83% 

Table 11—HIDTA Clandestine Laboratory Activities, 2005 

 Baseline # Targeted 

# Identified % Identified 

Actual 

Change 

from 

Baseline 

Suspicious Precursor/Essential 

Chemical Transactions* 

 0 

Laboratory Dump 

Sites 0 

Chemical/Glassware 

Seizures 0 
24

Table 13—Percentage of HIDTA Initiatives Using Event 

and Case De-confliction Services, by Year.

Year 

Total 

HIDTA 

Initiatives

# Initiatives Targeted to 

Use Services 

# Initiatives 

Using 

% Initiatives 

Using 

2004 10 7 7 70% 

2005 10 7 7 70% 

2006 

2007 

Table 14—Percentage of Event and Case De-conflictions Submitted, by Year.

Year 

Baseline # 

Deconflictions 

Submitted 

# Deconfliction 

Submissions Targeted 

# Event Deconflictions 

Submitted 

# 

Case/Subject 

Deconflictions 

Submitted 

Total Deconflictions 

Submitted 

% Deconflictions 

Submitted 

2004 7500 2883 6228 9111 121% 

2005 9111 9383 3675 7215 10,890 116% 

Table 15—Percentage of Investigations Provided 

Analytical Support, by Year.

Year 

Baseline # 

Investigations 

Receiving 

Analytical 

Support 

# Investigations 

Targeted 

for Analytical 

Support 

# Investigations 

Provided 

Analytical 

Support 

% Targeted 

Investigations 

Supported 

2004 3 5 167% 

2005 5 35 79 225% 

2006 

2007 

Table 16—Percentage of HIDTA Initiative Investigations Referred 

 to Other HIDTAs and Other Agencies, by Year.

Year 

Total 

HIDTA Initiative Investigations 

# Initiative 

Investigations 

Targeted for 

Referral 

# HIDTA 

Initiative 

Investigations Referred to 

Other HIDTAs 

# HIDTA 

Initiative 

Investigations Referred to 

Other 

Agencies 

Total Initiative 

Investigations 

Referred 

% Targeted 

Initiative 

Investigations Referred 

2004 207 40 48 17 65 163% 

2005 260 67 37 66 103 153% 

2006 0 

2007 0 
Worksheet for Core TABLE 5: Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005 

Worksheet: 1 Nevada HIDTA Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005 

Drug Seized (kg or D.U.) 

Amount Cost per Location Seized Wholesale Value kg/D.U. (kg/D.U.) 

LV 0.014 $25,000 Heroin kg $350 

LV 385.575 $16,500 Cocaine HCL kg $6,361,988 

LV 1.985 $18,000 Crack Cocaine kg $35,730 

Cannabis commercial LV 1128.276 $1,210 

grade kg $1,365,214 

275 $9,350 

Marijuana (indoor) kg LV 

 

$2,571,250 

 

LV 13.663 $21,000 Methamphetamine kg $285,557 

LV 66.883 $30,250 Methamphetamine ice kg $2,023,211 

LV 20,520 $16.00 Ecstasy (MDMA) (D.U.s) $328,321 

LV 0 $0.0 

 $ 

LV 0 $0.0 

 $ 

Total Wholesale Value $12,971,620 

25
IX. List of Tables and Charts 

• Core Table 1 – Initiative results for 2005, pp 11, 22. 

• Core Table 2 – Percentage of DTOs Disrupted or Dismantled by Scope, 2005, pp 11, 23. 

• Core Table 3 – Percentage of Money Laundering Organizations Disrupted or Dismantled, 

2005, pp 12, 23. 

• Core Table 4 – Operational Scope of all DTO Cases Initiated, 2005, pp 12, 23. 

• Core Table 5 – Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005, pp 12, 24. 

• Core Table 6 – Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs Removed from the Marketplace by 

Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005, pp 13, 24. 

• Core Table 7 – Return on Investment (ROI) for Assets Removed from the Marketplace by 

Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005, pp 13, 24. 

• Core Table 8 – Total Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs and Assets Removed from the 

Marketplace by Nevada HIDTA Initiatives, 2005, pp 13, 25. 

• Core Table 9 – Prosecution Initiative Cost per Investigation, 2005, pp 14, 25. 

• Core Table 10 – Value of Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs Dismantled in 2005, by 

Size, pp 15, 25. 

• Core Table 11 – Clandestine Laboratory Activities, 2005, pp 14, 26. 

• Core Table 12 – Training Efficiency by Year and Type of Training, pp 15, 26. 

• Core Table 13 – Percentage of HIDTA Initiatives Using Event and Case De-confliction, by 

year, pp 16, 26. 

• Core Table 14 – Percentage of Event and Case De-conflictions Submitted, by Year, pp 16, 

27. 

• Core Table 15 – Percentage of Investigations Provided Analytical Support, by Year, pp 16, 

27. 

• Core Table 16 – Percentage of Initiative Investigations Referred to Other HIDTAs and Other 

Agencies, by Year, pp 17, 27. 

• Supplemental Table 1 – Clark County Demographic Trends, p 8. 

• Supplemental Table 2 – Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures, p 9. 

• Supplemental Table 3 – Methamphetamine Lab. Seizures in Clark Co. – 2005, p 15. 

• Supplemental Table 4– Investigative Support Center Activity, p 17. 

• Supplemental Table 5 – Nevada HIDTA Fugitive Investigative Strike Team (FIST) cost per 

Fugitive Arrested – 2005, p 17. 

• Worksheet for Core Table 5: Drugs Removed from the Marketplace, 2005, p 26. 

X. Reference Sources

• El Paso Intelligence Center 

• National Drug Intelligence Center 

• U.S. Department of State 

• Photographs -accessvegas.com 

• Las Vegas Perspective 2004 

• Pew Hispanic Center 

• Quarterly Trends in the Traffic – 3rd Quarter FY 2005, DEA Los Angeles Field Division 

• HIDTA 2004 Annual Report 

• Nevada HIDTA Quarterly & DTO Reports (Quarters 1-4, 2005) 

26