A new state bill that would change regulations for the hemp industry is drawing criticism from both cannabis and hemp professionals in California, but for different reasons.
If Assembly Bill 45 is passed, it would require manufacturers of food products of dietary supplements that contain hemp to register with the State Department of Public Health. Manufacturers would also need to be able to show proof that the hemp used in their products was obtained from a state or country that has an industrial hemp program that monitors hemp for human and animal consumption.
It would also stop any restrictions on goods just because they contain hemp.
The Long Beach Collective Association (LBCA), a group of individuals and businesses in the local cannabis industry, opposes the implementation of AB 45. It has encouraged its social media followers to write to their state senators asking them to reject the bill.
While the LBCA believes the testing and labeling standards set forth in AB 45 are not thorough enough, the California Hemp Association does not believe that hemp should be placed under the control of the Department of Cannabis Control.
Proponents of the bill say it would explicitly legalize hemp extracts such as CBD while ensuring the hemp it’s derived from comes from a trustworthy source, while opponents say it doesn’t require enough testing for hemp products and would mix the regulation of a federally legal crop with cannabis, which is still federally illegal.
California State Senator Lena Gonzalez, who represents Long Beach, voted in favor of AB 45 when it was being deliberated by the Senate Committee on Health, of which she is a member.
The Senate Committee on Health unanimously voted in favor of the bill on June 23, before passing it on to the Senate Committee on Agriculture.
According to a Jan. 2019 memo by the State of California Department of Justice, adding CBD to food products is restricted regardless of whether the CBD is derived from hemp or cannabis plants.
The bill is currently in the State Assembly. It was read to the State Senate for the third time on Sept. 8, where it was passed with 29 votes in favor and 2 votes against. Gonzalez was among the 29 senate lawmakers who voted in favor of AB 45.
“The bill effectively creates a double standard in which members of the legal cannabis market are held to a higher level of compliance and more stringent testing standards than the would-be hemp market,” the LBCA said in an Instagram post Aug. 23.
Proponents of the bill say it would explicitly legalize hemp extracts such as CBD while ensuring the hemp it’s derived from comes from a trustworthy source, while opponents say it doesn’t require enough testing for hemp products and would mix the regulation of a federally legal crop with cannabis, which is still federally illegal.
Adam Hijazi, president of the LBCA, told the Signal Tribune that the testing and labeling requirements laid out by AB 45 are not adequate.
Hijazi said that while future testing standards for hemp do not necessarily have to be the same or as stringent as those for cannabis, he believes professionals and public health officials who are familiar with cannabis testing should be consulted to create a new standard for the state.
“Set the par levels, you know, and the action levels of these testings to a place that is truly safe for public consumption first, and then also in a way that is pragmatic and objective for the industry,” Hijazi said. “So that way it doesn’t have to be more burdensome or more costly than it needs to be. It’s definitely a balance.”
Three hemp products have been “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) by the FDA: hulled hemp seeds, hemp seed protein powder and hemp seed oil.
These three hemp-derived ingredients can be added to beverages and food as long as they are included in the ingredient list.
The 2018 Farm Bill passed by the federal legislature ensured that hemp products would not be considered a controlled substance by the federal government.
Under the Farm Bill, plants and their extracts must have 0.3% THC or less to be considered hemp.
Besides THC, hemp extracts such as CBD and other cannabinoids aren’t regulated at the federal level.
According to Hijazi, hemp testing is only focused on whether the THC level is at or below 0.3%, whereas cannabis testing focuses on around 46 other materials, nutrients and pesticides.
The California Hemp Association also opposes AB 45.
Under AB 45, hemp production in the state would be regulated jointly by the Department of Food and Agriculture, the State Department of Public Health and the Department of Cannabis Control, which is controlled by the state.
The California Hemp Association doesn’t believe the Department of Cannabis Control should regulate the state’s hemp industry, as cannabis is still federally illegal whereas hemp is recognized as a legal crop by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA.)
“This is a USDA, Farm Bill approved commodity crop,” said Wayne Richman, president of the California Hemp Association. “It’s not marijuana. It’s marijuana’s clean cousin, if you will. And so we want to hold the line on the definition.”
Another point of contention is the regulation of inhalable hemp products, such as smokable hemp flower. While the manufacturing of an inhalable product was at first completely banned in AB 45, except for out-of-state sale, an update to the bill made last week only keeps the ban in place until a tax on inhalable hemp products can be enacted.
“Craft hemp flower, or smokable hemp, commands a far higher price on the market than biomass or most other hemp products,” Executive Director of the Hemp Industries Association Jody McGinness said in an email to the Signal Tribune. “Prohibiting it, along with being illogical from a policy standpoint and unfair to consumers, would be crushing to many farmers who are struggling to make a profit from hemp right now.”
Richman concurred that banning smokable hemp flower would significantly affect the livelihoods of California’s hemp farmers.
“They found a market for it,” Richman said. “People are interested in smoking hemp as a replacement for smoking tobacco or vaping. So obviously that became a market opportunity and then became important income.”
Both the LBCA and California Hemp Association stated that they are open to working with members of the other industry to come to a consensus on hemp regulations in California.
“Stay tuned because we’re not done getting rid of this bill,” Richman said. “And if folks like the cannabis groups want to sit down and have an intellectually honest conversation about how we could work together, that’s great.”
According to Hijazi, there hasn’t been a lot of communication between the two industries.
“I just don’t think that there’s been enough conversation between the various groups to kind of really bring them together,” Hijazi said. “This is the cannabis industry, so volatile, so many different things are still changing and, you know, there’s a lot of catching up to do. We’re always open to having those conversations. So, I think we’re always open to learning from different people, different opportunities, different ways to approach it.”