WA Hemp in Food Task Force - Meeting
(December 14, 2022)

Here are some observations from the Wednesday December 14th Washington State Hemp in Food Task Force (WA Hemp in Food Task Force) Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• WSDA Produce Safety Program Management Analyst Jill Wisehart reviewed the legislative report, acknowledging a couple of changes from the prior draft and accepting input for further revisions (audio - 2m, notes).
  • The task force met to discuss final changes to the latest draft of the document on November 16th.
  • Although the report had been submitted to the Washington State Legislature and “we met our deadline for the report,” Wisehart remarked, “we can still make changes.” She and a “person that put together” their document would collect any feedback “through next week” and “replace the document.”
    • Suggested changes included:
      • A revised graphic on page eight to modify language on hemp extracts following suggestions by members at the October 19th meeting.
      • Medicine Creek Analytics Science Director Amber Wise added comments on a copy of the final report.
      • Some changes to appendices.

• The task force members spent most of the meeting discussing whether they could agree to tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) limits for hemp cannabinoids in foods, beverages, and dietary supplements for inclusion in draft legislation for the 2023 legislative session.
  • Dave Wyckoff, CEO of Wyckoff Farms, wanted to know if there was a level of THC in products the WSDA staff would “consider to be as acceptable, at least as a placeholder in the pilot program, until there is further input from…regulations or further legislation?” Wisehart emphasized that she couldn’t speak for the department in that matter, knowing that Policy Advisor to the Director and Legislative Liaison Kelly McLain “is a little bit more involved in some of those specific discussions and I'm sure she'll be following up” (audio - 2m).
  • Wisehart established that Luisa Castro, WSDA Food Safety Division Assistant Director, had been sent the draft legislation and was expected to respond to McLain “by the end of the week in terms of next steps.” Bonny Jo Peterson, Industrial Hemp Association of Washington (IHEMPAWA) Executive Director and task force member, stressed it was a “very rough draft starting point to see what could be supported” by WSDA leadership and later added that the draft legislation had been shared “about two weeks ago” (audio - 2m).
    • Wyckoff sought a better idea of when WSDA staff would disclose an acceptable THC milligram (mg) level, and Wisehart clarified department officials were going to give feedback “on the draft, but minus the milligram amount” (audio - 2m).
  • Peterson noted the task force had not arrived at “a specific milligram amount for THC in the report” and she wanted to hear from members who hadn’t been “part of the discussion at the last meeting where we changed the recommendation in the report,” in particular University of Washington Center for Cannabis Research (UW CCR) Director Nephi Stella (audio - 4m).
    • Stella understood they hadn’t agreed to a THC limit for hemp in food, and the “next step that we're proposing is to put a group together that will actually further evaluate the situation.” Peterson said the idea was to have a deeper “independent literature review by…the legislature’s staff scientists.”
    • Texting with McLain, Wisehart said “she indicated that the group will have until a bill is dropped to figure out what the milligrams of THC you would want. I guess it's not necessarily a WSDA decision.”
    • Verda Bio CEO Jessica Tonani brought up a Colorado task force which was also drafting recommendations to their state legislature“concerning intoxicating hemp products, legislative and rulemaking recommendations, and the analysis of the effectiveness of each recommendation for the regulation of intoxicating hemp products.” This report was going to include mandating a more specific review of scientific literature, she explained, along with a “beginning” THC limit based on what that task force “believed” to be best. Tonani paraphrased the Colorado group as being cautious since “we know that things may change, and so we want to put [a THC limit] essentially in rules, and have the ability to change it in the future.” She’d gotten the impression from earlier meetings that “funding for an external group to potentially kind of do that moving forward” was something task force members would advocate for along with any bill.
      • Find out more about Colorado hemp in food standards.
  • Brad Douglass, Spoke Sciences Chief Regulatory Officer and Vice President of Chemistry, saw the Colorado draft report recommended limits on “serving size would apply across the board for everything” regardless of product type. Peterson said that was her understanding, though the only difference between products “was the labeling” for dietary supplements  (audio - 3m).
    • Tonani laid out that the draft from the Colorado task force limited THC to “two and a half milligrams; a 15 to 1 ratio is what they landed on with kind of three classes of compounds…known impairing, known un-impairing, and compounds that potentially can be impairing.”
    • Wise recalled Washington State Department of Health (DOH) toxicology staffer Barbara Morrissey had been the first to advise “an external literature review,” and had suggested it was previously done “when we're in situations like this where there might be literature out there, or more coming in” that needed professional review rather than a volunteer task force. Building off their findings, she expected Washington legislative staff could resolve the question of a THC limit. Stella concurred, “we've exhausted most of our resources so it'll be interesting to have another point of view.”
    • Stella wondered “if that were to move forward and the process was to be implemented, how long does it take for such a group to actually provide that answer because I think that's what Dave…is waiting for.” Peterson relayed that “Barb and Kelly had mentioned that” with sources “like the EU [European Union], and the Australia, and Canada…government statements of what they refer to plus what we've already” found, a staff review “doesn't take too long” (audio - 1m).
  • Wyckoff asked Stella “what would the process look like to make, for you to feel comfortable,” being mindful that “what we're looking at is a pilot program for a couple years” (audio - 7m).
    • Stella replied that he’d need time to outline what he expected, but having reviewed all of what they’d discussed as a group, he was “not comfortable with the numbers that were provided by some of the previous reports,” including from Colorado. Among Canadian researchers, he had recognized some names, but felt the “cannabinoid field of research is very big and therefore there's a lot of very different type[s] of expertise” and yet “not a lot of the individuals that were, that have the expertise in the potential side effects of THC and therefore, I'm not sure that the recommendations were…at the same level of scrutiny.” Stella talked about relying "more on epidemiological studies that survey…the population who's actually taking these products…and I think we were starting to have some… levels of understanding of intoxication.” Stella had also heard “one of the new concern[s] is that low-level of THC might have some anti-inflammatory properties and that's something we haven't even started tackling in our task force. And therefore I'm not able to answer your question Dave, I'm sorry.”
    • Wyckoff appreciated what Stella was saying, but found “it seems rather important that unless we're just going to have no cannabinoids in food and beverage, it seems rather important to at least be able to have some threshold.” Tonani pointed out that the Colorado task force referenced research on “full spectrum hemp products” as part of a federal new dietary ingredients (NDI) application by the medical cannabis company Charlotte’s Web that included THC, and “we do have access to the stuff that they put together.”
    • Wyckoff sought elaboration on the status of the NDI, which Douglass described as having achieved “the equivalent of being rejected by FDA but more on technical grounds.” Wyckoff then asked Stella whether the data—which Wyckoff believed to cover “billions” of doses—could be “important epidemiologically.” Stella answered that he hadn’t reviewed the material and didn’t yet know (audio - 3m).
  • WA Hemp in Food Task Force facilitator Steven Byers indicated that Peterson would be sending additional information to task force members before asking for other possible actions they could take (audio - 5m).
    • Tonani suggested the group wanted to “figure out somewhere to put the stake in the ground” for a hemp in food pilot program, secure “funding to have reviews,” and update limits on cannabinoids as warranted, with an aim to keep regulation “with the science and provide consumer safe products.”
    • Peterson stated part of Morrissey’s “explanation seemed like that there was a possibility that we could get a review in a very short time frame” and she hoped McLain would be “able to come back to us at some point with an amount” for the THC limit. She anticipated there would be lawmaker support for the idea as well, with it mainly being a matter of “figuring out here's the pieces, and how much…we want in that big package set aside for all of that.”
    • Douglass believed they could do more to define “what’s important” for the scope of work in any future review of the topic. His assessment was that “people are coming at this with different questions, really and that's why nobody can really agree on and answer” what kind of cannabinoid profile in a consumable was “safe for everyone.”
  • Tonani interpreted the Concentration and Safety Work Group recommendations as grounded in a perspective that hemp cannabinoids in food were for adults, which prompted Stella to acknowledge, “I had missed that part.” Byers invited several members of the task force to be involved in distilling the questions “that you would hand to a group of staff scientists” (audio - 7m).
    • Tonani agreed to be part of the effort, provided she got some help, recalling that the work group had definitely advised the items be labeled as for adults only. Stella inquired how that would work in stores, to which Tonani answered it would work “very similar to vitamins or other things that a youth could access with an adult use only warning on it, unless there [were] some other restrictions” they wanted to recommend. Wise backed limiting the product rules to being “on the label and not necessarily like an age-gated ID check.”
    • Stella offered to assist with editing questions after Tonani made a first pass at drafting them and others on the task force could refine them. 
  • Looking at what they could be doing next on the draft bill language under review by WSDA staff, Byers asked, “what do you all envision in terms of individual tasks” which needed to be finalized (audio - 7m).
    • “These questions answer, to some degree, the milligram question,” argued Tonani, curious “if we put some specific warnings on products to limit youth [access] does that…sway anything for a short-term decision on milligrams?” She felt any legislation needed an answer to this, and “other states, other countries are kind of narrowing” to a 2.5mg THC limit, “but I also understand that there is the possibility that not everybody's comfortable with that.” Peterson reiterated McLain’s input on behalf of WSDA would help.
    • Another challenge according to Wyckoff was that the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) “considers its jurisdiction to cover anything that is impairing.” This led him to feel a proposed agency definition for “level of impairment is the appropriate level…for [the legislation’s] purpose.” He knew the industry draft legislation included multiple THC “thresholds” depending on product type and servings per package. Wyckoff saw other challenges, but was mostly fearful the task force was “running out of time; it's the middle of December” and the legislative session would start on January 9th, 2023.
    • Byers concluded proper next steps were elusive “because we don't know, or we can't make certain decisions without knowing” additional information.
  • Trecia Ehrlich, WSDA Hemp Program Manager, chimed in with some “expectation setting,” stating, “I think it's really unlikely that Kelly's gonna walk in here at any point and say this is the milligram number…and therefore WSDA fully supports this legislation.” She remarked that was “typically not how we do things. I think the folks in this group are going to have to come with the number, and that number probably won't be supported; it just might not be rejected.” Furthermore, Ehrlich knew “there's plenty of time even in, during session for that number to change,” and encouraged the task force to “stick with a number you expect won't be rejected and know that there is wiggle room and evolution.” She expected any milligram limit was likely to end up debated “at the negotiating table with the LCB and DOH during session” (audio - 1m).
  • After Stella left the meeting, the idea of voting on a limit was raised by Tonani who said that was how it had been done on the Colorado task force. She asked Ehrlich if that would be “a viable solution for us.” Ehrlich responded that it would depend on the established consensus building process among members, but expected voting was “a reasonable option for y’all.” Wisehart believed there was WSDA interest in having staff be “a part of this group moving forward” and she was open to facilitating, but not leading that work (audio - 14m).
    • Members discussed the process of how to vote on differing recommendations and details like whether they’d “vote on a milligram with the ratio,” or “an initial threshold for the pilot program that is subject to further modification.”
    • Byers observed there were “25 or 30% of so-called task force members that haven't been here since September, or very intermittently since September, and who would not be up to date on many of the nuanced discussions and decisions that you all have made.” He wondered who felt prepared to “re-educate” this portion of the task force on what they missed in relation to the group’s report and recommendations. Byers was also confident any vote was “in no way, or ever will be, binding on anyone.”
    • Peterson highlighted they should consider that the “vote would be at another meeting after we get feedback from Kelly” and would not impact the substance of their report, but strictly influence “the legislation.” The full task force could be notified and invited, and she was optimistic “this is important enough that people will show up and…I'm pretty sure I know how everybody's gonna vote at that point.”
    • Jim Makoso, Lucid Lab Group Director and Washington State Legislative Task Force on Social Equity in Cannabis (WA SECTF) Co-Chair, joined the dialogue to note votes were “based on a quorum” in WA SECTF, but cautioned that issues like “how many milligrams of THC specifically should be allowed in a product are points and topics that are coming up in many other conversations. So, I think it's important not to be casual about what is actually being recommended to be put in any type” of bill since “it's a big conversation.”
    • Members agreed to schedule an additional meeting for the following week at which point Wisehart believed there’d be feedback from McLain.
  • Wyckoff had the impression their review of the literature had been thorough, and wasn’t sure of the purpose of further searching. Peterson said Morrissey and McLain had framed this process as having state staff “take all the stuff we've already looked at and these are other scientists that…say whether…it's valid information and they give a summary.” Additionally, they could ask lawmakers for “further reviews as time goes on” (audio - 6m).
    • Tonani understood the process to be more akin to an “audit” of provided sources, rather than a search for additional information. She had an expectation that staff would ensure the task force had been thorough in their reviews of a "level of impairment," as well as concerns over "age related access, and just confirming that the milligram concentration that's recommended wouldn't cause issues around that.”

• WA Hemp in Food Task Force facilitator Steven Byers went over the next steps for the group, prompting some final remarks (audio - 6m).
  • Stella was unable to return to the meeting but sent a message:“I did back of the envelope quick calculation, do the following numbers make sense to the group. I'll be comfortable stating a pilot with a max CBD [cannabidiol] of 30 milligrams” and one milligram of THC “it would agree with the 0.3% hemp rules.” Peterson challenged his calculation and declared, “one milligram is not something that’s appropriate to continue to talk about at this point.”
    • WSLCB request legislation proposed limiting products outside the legal cannabis market to a “THC concentration of not more than 1 milligram THC per unit and 3 milligrams per package of product.”
  • Byers and members settled on scheduling another meeting for Wednesday December 21st to hear last minute updates and address remaining uncertainties around cannabinoid limits. Wisehart affirmed that a staff audit of their research literature could get underway by then.
  • Makoso spoke up to say “where the conversation goes from here is very interesting to me and a lot of my colleagues" in the adult use cannabis sector.
  • Lukas Barfield, Quality West Cannabis (QWC) Owner, also argued “THC is going to sort of be in the sights this year for a lot of folks in the legislature and I feel like if we try to say ‘we won, you didn't, 2.5 [mg] too bad. This is what we recommend, this is what we want.’ That could be a good thing because then we have a number, but then it could be a bad thing because it could really rally some opposition who has already very organized around the three letters of ‘THC.’” Fearing that hemp in food could get wrapped up with a near “hysteria” around that compound, Barfield hoped they could reach a consensus without a vote (audio - 3m).
    • Cannabis Observer Founder Gregory was a guest on Barfield’s podcast, the Cannabis Corner, in early December where he discussed cannabinoid concentration policymaking and other issues.