The new comment period is open until Oct. 8

By Tyler Olson | September 9, 2020

The future of regulations on the hemp industry is up in the air as the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reconsiders a slate of proposed rules ahead of the 2021 growing season.

These include directives on the testing and disposal of hemp that growers and even some U.S. senators have said could stunt the growth of the industry that was created by the 2018 Farm Bill.

On Sept. 4 the USDA announced that it would reopen the comment period for the interim final rule (IFR) on domestic hemp production, seeking input from the public on a variety of provisions. At the center of the issue are two regulations — one that requires labs testing farmers’ hemp to be registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and one that would require disposal of hemp plants with non-compliant levels of THC (the active chemical in marijuana that is found in much lower levels in hemp) to happen with law enforcement involved.

Both of those rules had their implementation delayed until October 2021 earlier this year, but still have been the subject of criticism, including from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who wants the USDA to delay the implementation further into 2022.

…

Mickey Wilbanks, the California Department of Food and Agriculture account manager with InfiniteCal, one of the largest cannabis testing labs in the state — which tests both hemp and marijuana — echoed similar concerns about the involvement of law enforcement in both the testing of hemp and the destruction of plants that do test hot.

“I know a lot of registered growers in California and they’re all trying to follow these regulations to a tee,” she said. “The fact that regulators now want to involve the DEA so much, it’s almost like they’re treating these registrants as criminals when hemp has been federally legalized and it’s just not necessary.”

Start by understanding what works and what doesn’t work.

 By Josh Swider | September 4, 2020

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

The cannabis industry has a testing problem — and it may not be going away anytime soon. Why? Inexperienced technicians, unscrupulous labs, outdated testing regulations, and inferior testing equipment all factor into the inconsistencies and false results that plague the business.

But there is some hope. By taking action now to fix issues in cannabis testing, we can ensure consistent testing results, guarantee the integrity of products on dispensary shelves, and, ultimately, protect cannabis consumers’ health. This includes creating reasonable and effective action levels for contaminants like pesticides in cannabis products.

How we got into this mess

When medical marijuana burst into California in the late ’90s, the government did not hold businesses to the same testing and manufacturing standards as more established industries like foods and supplements. As entrepreneurs flocked to the rapidly growing cannabis market, their businesses ran the spectrum from professional manufacturing facilities to home kitchens and garage operations. This lack of quality control created a minefield of safety concerns for cannabis consumers.

After more than a decade of no regulatory oversight, California’s legal cannabis industry suddenly found itself subject to restrictions put in place to protect consumers. Among these additions was mandated cannabis lab testing that examined both cannabinoid content and residual contaminants like pesticides and solvents.

Soon testing labs began popping up in markets throughout California to meet the significant demand created by legalization. Some of these were existing labs staffed by exceptional technicians who were unfortunately hindered by never working with cannabis before. But others were simply savvy players who saw a cash cow and took advantage of the opportunity, even if it meant cutting corners to increase profits.

State regulators oversee the cannabis market, including testing labs. Still, a report released by the California Department of Finance revealed that, among other difficulties, “the current status and location of personnel is not sustainable to provide effective and comprehensive oversight of cannabis activities throughout California.” This is directly due to funding issues and difficulties in hiring and training staff.