General Law Committee

JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT

SPONSORS OF BILL:

Governor M. Jodi Rell and the General Law Committee

REASONS FOR BILL:

To implement the Governor's budget recommendations.

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

Leonard C. Boyle, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety (DPS)

DPS supports this bill because it would provide a control procedure that would require retailers to keep ingredients sought to manufacture the drug be kept in locations inaccessible to consumers and be requested for purchase at the counter; it requires a maintenance log book with signatures, names and addresses of purchasers and prohibits the quantity of certain ingredients used in the drug production; and it expands the penalties specifically necessary to address the manufacture of methamphetamine at any stage, and for operating a drug lab. DPS supports “Having a dedicated fund for mediation paid for by the offender…” because it “…places costs of cleanup where they belong…” and reinforces the State's commitment to address the problem.

In summary, he states “the agency would suggest a technical change to the drafting of Section 1 of the bill, which amends Section 21a-240 of the general statutes by changing 'or' to 'and'. He explains “leaving the word “or” opens the door for thousands of structurally unrelated compounds, many of which are legal medications (OTC and prescription) that can produce symptoms identical to those caused by Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). Oral and written testimony.

Jackie Mandyck, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Consumer Protection (DCP)

“This is one of the Governor's proposals and is strongly supported by the Department.

Methamphetamine is a highly addictive drug causing major health and safety issues in many states. With this legislation, we hope to prevent this drug from gaining a strong foothold in our State.

This proposal will assist the Drug Control Division in restricting the ability to purchase mass quantities of pseudophedrine, a necessary component in the manufacture of methamphetamine. Because this proposal parallels the federal requirements already in place, retail outlets and consumers should not see the bill as a burden. The majority of vendors are in compliance with the requirement that pseudophedrine be kept behind the counter.

The proposal increases the criminal penalties in Conn. Gen. Stat. 21a-267 from a Class “A” misdemeanor to a Class “D” felony for the delivery, possession with intent to deliver, as well as manufacture with intent to deliver drug paraphernalia that are commonly used to manufacture controlled substances. The proposal increases the criminal penalties related to the operation of drug factories in Conn. Gen. Stat. 21a-277(c), and creates a mechanism to provide restitution for environmental damages caused by methamphetamine labs. Oral and written testimony.

Stephen N. Ment, State of Connecticut Judicial Branch

The Judicial Branch would support the bill with certain amendments to the language of the proposal. “regarding Section 2, …that the charge clearly identifies the type of activity and appropriate penalty associated with such violation. This would allow the Branch to more accurately distinguish and record the particular offense committed, which will allow criminal records to reflect whether an offender in a particular case is a first-time or subsequent offender.”

“It is unclear how section 5(b) would operate. This subsection provides that the court, must order a defendant to reimburse the state for cleanup costs. It is not clear how the court would know the cost of remediation or whether there would be a sanction for non-payment. We suggest the language on line 112-113 be amended to specify that the defendant's reimbursement to the state for the costs of clean-up be paid directly into the “methamphetamine laboratory clean-up account.” Written testimony.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

Robert A. Brex, Executive Director, Northeast Communities Against Substance Abuse

“This bill is a necessary piece of legislation which will allow for Connecticut to move forward with the prosecution of offenders, the clean-up of environmentally damaged sites and the limitation of access to a key ingredient needed to produce methamphetamine.” Oral and written testimony.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

None submitted