WA House RSG - Committee Meeting
(September 17, 2024)

Here are some observations from the Tuesday September 17th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 4 takeaways:

• Hannah Febach, Washington State Department of Health (DOH) Division of Prevention and Community Health Policy and Rules Manager, talked about the role her department played in communicating risks of tobacco and "high potency cannabis,” including educating retail staff, and mentioned the assistance of federal grants (audio - 4m, video - TVW, Presentation, Fact Sheet).
  • Formerly known as the Youth Marijuana Prevention and Education Program (YMPEP), the Youth Cannabis and Commercial Tobacco Prevention Program (YCCTPP) sponsored training on vapor product disposal in November 2023, followed by a training on cannabis education and safe storage led by University of Washington Addictions, Drug, and Alcohol Institute (UW ADAI) researcher Bia Carlini the following month.
  • Febach told lawmakers that Heidi Glesmann and Marie Gray co-managed the YCCTPP. She indicated they would cover “a brief overview of the department's role in cannabis and commercial tobacco prevention work and share some high level information about our programming,” as well as more details about the “2023 Healthy Youth Survey [HYS] related to youth tobacco and cannabis use. And finally, we'll share some insight into the department's goals looking forward in these important areas of public health work.”
    • Former Washington State Health Care Authority (WA HCA) Prevention Research and Evaluation Manager Tyler Watson joined DOH representatives to discuss the 2023 HYS results during a webinar on March 20th after briefing members of the WA HCA Prevention Research Collaborative.
    • In his subsequent role as a Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Research Specialist, Watson talked with board members about survey responses on July 23rd.
  • Providing “some clarification on word choice in our presentation today, we talk about ‘commercial’ tobacco,” said Febach, in order to recognize “the difference between commercial tobacco and traditional tobacco, which has cultural, medicinal, and spiritual importance to several American Indian tribes. Any references we make to tobacco today, we're talking about commercial tobacco.”
    • Cannabis has had similar entheogenic significance, including in the United States. Cannabis and religious practices date back centuries, and legal access to the plant has become commonplace on tribal reservations. The US Virgin Islands Office of Cannabis Regulation has rules for sacramental organizations in addition to their commercial and medical standards.
  • Febach highlighted three reasons DOH officials undertook this work:
    • First, “that commercial tobacco remains the leading cause of preventable death in the United States.”
    • “The second is that use of nicotine and THC [tetrahydrocannabinol] can have a negative impact on developing brains, including areas that control attention, learning, mood, memory, and impulse control…we're still learning about some of the long term health effects of high potency THC.”
      • Researchers, public health officials, and cannabis sector interests planned to discuss cannabis health effects and policy at the Thursday September 19th symposium hosted by the UW ADAI regarding, “Cannabis, Schizophrenia, and Other Psychotic Disorders: Moving Away from Reefer Madness Toward Science.”
    • “And finally, emerging products like new vapor products and nicotine pouches are surging in popularity with youth. We really see it as our role at the department to ensure that parents, public health…workers, educators, and policymakers understand the risks associated with youth commercial tobacco and cannabis use, and have the confidence, skills, and tools to support the youth in their lives.”
  • Febach described how DOH work was “guided by the Revised Code of Washington and federal guidance for commercial tobacco,” and included coordinating “prevention and cessation efforts across the state, disseminating state and federal funds, serving as the CDC [US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] grantee for the National and State Tobacco Control Program,” plus acting as “primary subject matter expert and resource for organizations, communities, and individuals in Washington.” For cannabis, their efforts included, “overseeing the cannabis use public health hotline, prevention and education, programming, media based education campaigns, outreach to priority populations, disseminating State funds to the Washington Poison Center for cannabis and vapor prevention, and implementing policy changes such as addressing the retail education needs for high THC cannabis, which stem from legislation passed last year.”

• Commercial Tobacco Prevention Manager Heidi Glesmann and Community Partnership Manager Marie Gray offered their "cautious interpretation" of 2023 Healthy Youth Survey (HYS) responses around access, use, and “co-use” of tobacco and cannabis vapor products (audio - 8m, video - TVW).
  • Glesmann shared that a “unique” aspect of their programming was “more than half of our grantees and contractors are doing work that focuses on both cannabis and commercial tobacco prevention as well as tobacco cessation.” Her presentation showed how community partners were located around Washington, and she remarked when staff were “identifying priority topics, geographic areas of priority, or other programmatic decisions, we are using data as one of the tools to support this decision making,” including the biannual HYS responses.
  • Gray stated that the survey was useful for “identifying trends and patterns in adolescent…health behaviors, [as well as finding] areas of need to inform policy and practice, evaluate the impact of school and community prevention efforts, and lastly, provide data for grants and other funding sources.” Glesmann also sounded a note of caution, as “this survey went through some changes, and in tandem with the pandemic of COVID-19…there were some shifts and changes in data that were not present in previous years of this survey. This calls for cautious interpretation of the results over time for cannabis and tobacco. Specifically, we saw a drop of use by approximately 50% in 2021. That dropped rate has remained stable in 2023 and we are continuing to monitor this in the next iteration of the survey,” slated for 2025.
    • Average lifetime and past 30-day use of cannabis among surveyed high schoolers was lower than the national average according to data from the federal Monitoring the Future study.
  • Considering the 2023 results around tobacco and cannabis, Gray said “the data presented primarily focuses on 10th graders, as that is our program benchmark,” where “cannabis and E-cigarettes are one of the top three highest reported substances or products used.” Moreover, “smokeless tobacco and nicotine had a large increase in reported usage, and that is due to a question modification: products like nicotine pouches, lozenges, gum, and toothpicks were added to the definition.”
  • According to Gray, cannabis responses reinforced a “disparity that exists in reported use, especially when you disaggregate the data by demographics like race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, identified risk, and protective factors, grade average, and mental health status.” Among five populations making up the high end of cannabis use rates, she pointed out that “American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Black or African American 10th graders that report cannabis use [reported at] 1.5 times more than the state prevalence.” Glesmann added that average tobacco or e-cigarette use was also higher among these groups.
  • Focusing on cannabis and tobacco vapor items, Glesmann emphasized, “due to the prevalence of use…as well as the overlap between cannabis and commercial tobacco, [responses showed the] primary method of accessing those products, these vapor products, is through social sources.” Gray mentioned that cannabis and tobacco vapor products had significant overlap, so HYS “has a question to address this, and helps our program understand what youth are inhaling when they're using these vapor products.” Students were reporting using nicotine vapor items the most, “with THC second, and a combination third.” Respondents who were unsure were closely behind in the “co-use of substances.”
  • Glesmann concluded their briefing by sharing how flavored vapor products, though already prohibited in the regulated cannabis market, remained common and favored by youth. The majority of 10th graders “report using it with a flavored tobacco and or cannabis product,” she said, and of those two in three reported using flavored cannabis vapor products. Use of multiple substances was another top concern, Glesmann remarked, which “only reinforces for us our thought that prevention and education is an intersectional issue.”
    • A literature review on flavored vapor products was one of the first two cannabis research briefs published by WSLCB. Watson discussed the subject with board members on August 20th.
  • The impression Glesmann and Gray had was that, “while use continues to decline, there is still a need for prevention and education to maintain that decline.”

• Glesmann and Gray took a moment to mention the goals of YCCTPP along with new staff joining the program (audio - 2m,  video - TVW).
  • Considering required components in HB 2320, a law passed related to “high potency THC,” Gray said their implementation of the statute involved hiring a new staffer (“which is really exciting”), developing mandatory signage for stores, plus “the beginnings of development for the retail education course.”
  • Gray also acknowledged working with WSLCB counterparts “to work on the recently completed cannabis consumer survey that will help guide public education and other programmatic efforts.”
  • Glesmann referenced the fact sheet provided to the committee that named six focus areas for the program through 2027:
    • Inform Washingtonians about the effects of cannabis and commercial tobacco on overall wellness through education.
    • Foster collaboration and innovation statewide in youth cannabis and commercial tobacco use prevention.
    • Ensure sustainability of cannabis and commercial tobacco prevention programming.
    • Improve social determinants of health to reduce disparities and improve quality of life in Washington.
    • Utilize upstream prevention approaches by drawing from existing science-based frameworks to create policy, systems, and environmental change.
    • Leverage partnerships and resources to move towards universal barrier-free access to commercial tobacco dependence treatment.    

• Two lawmakers had a series of questions related to adult substance use prevention, racial and ethnic disparities, rural populations, and eliminating underage use.
  • Co-Chair Shelley Kloba was curious how education targeting adult retail consumers would impact youth substance use. Gray responded that this requirement was given to them by legislation, allowing regulators to emphasize more secure storage of cannabis in the home, and “hopefully that trickles down to youth” to reinforce the educational campaigns aimed at them (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Representative Melanie Morgan said she was struck by the presenters’ emphasis on higher rates of nicotine use among Native American and African American youth, believing that “I know how addictions get started: high stress, poverty, peer pressure, behavioral health.” She noticed they “threw in at the end of your presentation there about improving conditions…but I don't hear a plan on really, how to address these conditions as they could be the root cause of the addiction in the first way” (audio - 5m, video - TVW).
    • Febach felt DOH “truly relies on the work of our partners…in these efforts, things like community organizations and nonprofits that truly uplift those community driven solutions to address these types of disparities.” These partnerships were important since local organizations “know their communities best, and what types of prevention and support work that they need to move the needle on this,” she stated.
    • Glesmann offered more specifics, referring to the nine regional contractors for YCCTPP who each had “a network of sorts of groups or organizations or different agencies throughout their county, multi-county, or single county region,” and produced work plans informed by HYS data. She then noted that, statewide, “we additionally have priority population contractors…working in those regions. So for the American Indian/Alaskan Native community, it's the American Indian Health Commission of Washington State. And for the Black and African American community, it's the Center [for] Multicultural Health.” These groups got funding dedicated to cannabis and tobacco prevention, Glesmann explained, stating there were also “tailored media campaigns…for each of those demographic populations we have identified.” She stated that staff tried to find effective programs for communities with above average substance use, including through community grants, in an effort to “expand the prevention network that exists in Washington state.” Glesman welcomed new organizations or awareness efforts, indicating that the nine contractors were retained for “18 months, and they're heading into their year two starting in about 30 days.”
  • Morgan was also curious how the programs reached rural communities in Washington “making sure it's not just focused in urbanized areas on the west side of the mountains” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Glesmann named the Rural Network, “run by our Educational Service District 112. It's a statewide network that focuses on supporting the rural population and addressing substance use.” 
      • A representative from the district raised concerns to WSLCB staff about the Minors on Wholesale Licensed Premises rulemaking project on Monday September 16th, suggesting the children of licensees might steal cannabis from their parent’s businesses and give it to their friends (audio - 1m).
  • Kloba inquired about declining cannabis use seen in the 2021 and 2023 results. Acknowledging that the survey cohort was changed during the pandemic, she hoped it would be possible to “follow up with us and show…the breakdowns, the 12th, the 10th, the eighth graders, and show the use over time and how that has decreased. I think that would be helpful.” She was interested in clarification on what they considered “cannabis use,” asking for the panel to “refresh me on, on how you define current use” in HYS questions (audio - 3m, video - TVW).
    • Gray checked whether Kloba meant “the way that people are using cannabis, or the timeframes that are asked about?” Kloba responded, “they were defining ‘current use,’ and it was like, 8.8% of 10th graders were responding ‘yes’ to current use,” asking, “what does that mean?”
    • Glesmann answered that this was asking students about substance use within the last 30 days, regardless of mode of ingestion.
    • Kloba voiced gratitude, “I saw some breaking out of cannabis and delta-8[-THC and delta-]10, there was 2% use.” She pointed out that was “the type of stuff that is available online with no age gating, and that is extremely serious. It's not tested. It's got all kinds of garbage in there. And so thank you for making sure you're following up on that particular subset.”
    • Learn more about WSLCB enforcement around non-regulated cannabinoid products from a September 10th briefing to board members.
  • Morgan asked about tobacco and cannabis resources for adults “who would appreciate prevention as well.” She also raised the question of WSLCB staff who’d testified earlier, “what is the plan to eliminate the illegal use of these substances by adolescents?” She regarded the current program as being “after the fact that they've already…used, they've already become addicted,” requesting an explanation “what do we do up front in terms of barring adolescents from using for them, because it's illegal. And…how is this prevention that we're going to be looking at for adults?” (audio - 5m, video - TVW)
    • Glesmann suggested information on handling illegal use of cannabis was the domain of the Washington State Patrol (WSP), but that DOH did have resources geared towards adults that talked about health and abuse risks for cannabis as well as tobacco. She said a key audience for this message was supporting “individuals with behavioral health conditions.” While there were adult-specific cannabis prevention and cessation resources, much of their program “focuses on adults and influential adults. Part of the reason that cannabis is focused on…that 12 to 20 population is that's how it was written in the legislation for us.” Gray seconded this explanation of their resources and program focus on those under the legal age to consume cannabis.
  • WSLCB Director of Legislative Relations Marc Webster described how retail compliance checks—whereby Enforcement Officers sent those under 21 into a licensed premises to attempt to buy tobacco or cannabis products—ensure “cannabis licensees are not that vector in which product is getting into the hands of youth.” He also remarked that money from the State dedicated cannabis account “does go into some of the prevention activities that, that our partners at the Department of Health are talking about here.” He then mentioned, “the store is not the only way that this is getting into the hands of folks. So thinking about how you tackle something like internet sales is a much broader topic.”

Here are some observations from the Tuesday September 17th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Director of Policy and External Affairs Justin Nordhorn took legislators through agency work to implement HB 1453, “Providing a tax exemption for medical cannabis patients,” and answered questions.
  • The law—passed on March 14th—expanded a previous patient exemption on sales and use taxes by removing the 37% excise tax, but also narrowed the application of the exemption to only be offered by medically endorsed retailers selling Washington State Department of Health (DOH) compliant products to patients registered with the department.
  • Nordhorn began the panel by reviewing how patients could be eligible to receive the tax exemption, along with the remaining timeline for the rulemaking project  (audio - 9m, video - TVW, presentation).
    • To qualify for the exemption, Nordhorn explained the sale must occur at a licensed cannabis retailer with a medical cannabis endorsement, the patient must have a recognition card issued by DOH, and the product must be identified as medically compliant "high CBD [cannabidiol]," "high THC [tetrahydrocannabinol]," or "general use" cannabis products by department staff.
      • DOH staff hosted a webinar on the medical cannabis program more broadly on July 18th, and have scheduled a workshop on the program for October 17th.
    • While the bill took effect in June 2024, he indicated that rulemaking took time. Draft rules were filed in July, a public hearing was held in August, and the final rules were approved September 11th. Nordhorn relayed that the rules would become effective on October 12th.
      • WSLCB staff also hosted focus groups on the rulemaking project on June 3rd and 6th.
    • On recordkeeping and audit policies, Nordhorn commented that endorsed stores would be required to maintain detailed records to ensure compliance and facilitate audits. This included documenting the date of sale, product information, and the patient's unique identifier from their DOH recognition card. "And so, having those records together is a real benefit to the retailer. Other document recommendations [included] encouraging folks to save monthly sales tax reports from the point of sale system so that they can showcase that with the information around the COAs,” he said.
    • Nordhorn then described agency rules changes and oversight of the tax exemption, while highlighting obstacles ahead. Regarding packaging updates, he said there’d been "some challenges with that, particularly the liability of the retailer.” To address this, Nordhorn remarked WSLCB Licensing staff created a “streamlined approval approach” for existing products through a dedicated email: LabelApprovalMED@lcb.wa.gov. He also noted with only two labs accredited to test for heavy metals in the state at the moment, that licensees might be waiting on supplementary certificates of analysis (COAs) for as long as it would take agency officials to review and approve label updates (audio - 2m, video - TVW).
      • According to WSLCB records two additional labs, Testing Technologies, Inc and Green Grower Labs were also certified to test for heavy metals as of June 2024. 
    • Information sharing had also emerged as a challenge, as Nordhorn explained WSLCB needed to collaborate with DOH to verify patient cards. He indicated that circumstance may require changing current law (audio - 2m, video - TVW).
      • Nordhorn told the committee that WSLCB was pursuing an agency request bill to allow information sharing in a process similar to one established between DOH and the Washington State Department of Revenue for tax audits. He relayed that their Financial division would work with DOH to conduct audits to ensure proper application of the exemption. This would involve collaboration with DOH personnel to verify patient cards, but Nordhorn stressed that no personal information would be collected in this process.
        • WSLCB Director of Legislative Relations Marc Webster talked about this, and another cannabis request bill leaders planned to pursue, on September 10th.
  • Representative Kristine Reeves asked for and received elaboration on what information would be shared between WSLCB and DOH conveying why a proposed legislative change would be beneficial (audio - 5m,  video - TVW).
  • Committee Co-Chair Sharon Wylie was interested in knowing about market changes since approval of the tax exemption, asking if unregistered “medical patients and potential retailers who haven't sought” medical cannabis endorsements were “trying to do that? Has there been an influx of patients trying to get certification cards and retailers wanting to be eligible for the certification?” (audio - 2m, video - TVW)
    • Nordhorn acknowledged “a number of retailers’ interest [plus] a number of processors that are trying to get…medically compliant product into the market.” He referred questions on patient engagement to DOH staff, but did note “we have folks that had basically tried to set up some online medical card approvals” which weren’t allowed under existing law. Moreover, “one of the big challenges for the retailers is they're solely accountable for the excise tax collection and exemption, and so the processors, if they're not putting the qualifying product in appropriately, then the retailer’s at risk.”
  • Wylie then inquired whether the new law was leading to medically compliant products which had been tested for heavy metals becoming more available (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Nordhorn shared that “there is product on the shelf that has that,” and while previously there’d been “a few producer processors” manufacturing medically compliant products, “we are seeing an increase in product availability in the stores, which is, of course, one of the patient interest points.”

• Director of Legislative Relations Marc Webster talked about what officials were looking for in a new traceability platform, including suggesting the system needed to prepare to handle interstate commerce (audio - 6m, video - TVW).
  • The Cannabis Central Reporting System (CCRS) became operational in December 2021, but by July 2023 a traceability-focused Request for Information (RFI) seeking a third-party traceability vendor to take the place of CCRS came to the attention of the public, with Cannabis Observer Founder Gregory Foster among those calling for greater transparency by WSLCB leaders.
    • WSLCB Staff briefed on the traceability effort the following month.
    • Deputy Director Toni Hood discussed a traceability survey and new staff working on the effort to replace CCRS on August 14th.
    • At publication time, it was Cannabis Observer’s understanding that WSLCB staff had begun reaching out to engage stakeholders on ways to “improve the traceability and reporting system.”
  • In the work session, Webster described traceability as “systems to track cannabis plants through processed products and ultimately, sales." He shared how Washington State had first utilized BioTrack from 2014 to 2017, followed by MJFreeway from 2017 to 2021, and then CCRS.
    • Bringing up HB 2320, “Concerning high THC cannabis products," Webster told the committee the law required WSLCB staff to use CCRS data starting in “December of 2024, and report back to you all in November of 2025,” with traceability data on cannabis product categories, THC concentrations, and other market information.
    • The transition to CCRS was announced publicly in August 2021 and the system became active in the final weeks of 2021, although staff hadn’t resolved most software issues until February 2022, concluding what staff referred to as the “original scope of work.”
  • "We think it's time to begin looking at what a better traceability system could look like,” said Webster. Agency leaders recognized the limitations of the current system and had “submitted a budget request to do broad stakeholder outreach to inform next steps. What do licensees want? What do public health folks want? What do consumers want? And for all of these, what do they not want to see?" He claimed that a new system could incorporate feedback and be designed to improve efficiency, accuracy, and transparency in the cannabis industry.
  • Webster continued, saying that officials were also thinking about how a new platform would work with an ongoing systems modernization project (SMP) at the agency, plus what traceability would “look like in a federally legal system” where cannabis could be sold between states like other agricultural goods. He argued issues such as the need for interoperability with other state systems, and balancing public safety with industry efficiency had to be considered as WSLCB staff developed the new system.
    • On May 16th, rescheduling of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III was proposed by federal authorities, with a reported 43,000 remarks being submitted during a subsequent 60 day comment period.
      • On July 23rd, the Congressional Research Service published a briefing paper: “Rescheduling Marijuana: Implications for Criminal and Collateral Consequences.”
    • Started in 2015, the SMP went through delays and the loss of a vendor in 2017 leading to a need for more funding, including almost $18 million in a budget request from November 2021. $35,278,000 from the liquor revolving account was approved for the effort in the supplemental operating budget signed into law on March 29th.
    • SB 5069, a law allowing interstate commerce of cannabis following federal authorization was approved by legislators in May 2023.

• Enforcement Captain Matt Murphy went through the different analytical testing pathways for cannabis in the licensed market, along with the sampling volume and lab analysis process (audio - 4m, video - TVW)
  • Sampling of cannabis and cannabis products for testing could be performed by both Compliance Consultants and Enforcement Officers, where regulators acted as an “evidence custodian, transport[ing] the sample” to the Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) laboratory. Murphy noted the third pathway was licensee sampling and testing done by certified third-party labs.
  • A recent addition to the process was analysis of WSDA and third-party testing results by a WSLCB Chemist who Murphy stated had expertise in understanding cannabis testing, “and…those results are sent to Enforcement or Education if action is needed.”
  • According to Murphy’s presentation, the agency officials had conducted a significant number of complaint, investigative, and random samples in 2022, 2023, and 2024.
    • In 2022, WSLCB conducted 131 complaint or investigative samples, and 595 random samples.
    • In 2023, the agency conducted 166 complaint or investigative samples, and 419 random samples.
    • “And in 2024 so far this year, we've conducted 237 investigative samples.”

Here are some observations from the Tuesday September 17th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Enforcement Captain Matthew Murphy reviewed action taken following an agency investigation into Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) contamination in some Central Washington cannabis facilities (audio - 6m, video - TVW, presentation).
  • Murphy brought up the DDE investigation following his remarks on cannabis testing protocols. He talked about how, in 2023, WSLCB investigated the presence of legacy pesticide with the support of other agencies, and mentioned outcomes from funds budgeted that year to address soil contamination concerns in a part of Okanogan County.
    • WA House RSG members were previously briefed on the topic in December 2023.
  • Murphy described a pattern of DDE contamination which WSLCB investigators had initially noted at the end of 2022 when random “testing result show[ed] detectable levels of DDE, some above action levels” in rule. He noted the compound was a remnant from dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, “DDT, which was a pesticide that was outlawed in the United States in 1973,” and had been found in products from “18 licensed cannabis locations” in Okanogan County. All were placed under an administrative hold. When products from five producer/processors showed DDE above action levels, all conducted voluntary cannabis recalls.
  • Murphy suggested contamination concerns had been addressed, and WSLCB staff learned and improved collaboration with Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) and Washington State Department of Ecology counterparts. 
  • Murphy pointed out that lawmakers approved a capital budget appropriation and other money for soil grants as part of SB 5693, the 2023 operating budget. He added that Ecology staff had released updated information on DDT impacts on cannabis cultivation and were working on a legislative report due in December 2024.
  • "We did have some lessons learned on such a large project, we did get a better understanding of the lab limitations of the WSDA for testing, an understanding of timing of test results, a need for lab capacity, [and] a dedicated project manager during similar projects,” he said. Murphy further felt the situation showed the importance of robust systems for product tracking and recalls, and also mentioned ongoing initiatives to require heavy metal testing, explore partnerships with university labs for increased capacity, and develop a new traceability system.
    • Cannabis traceability was a topic covered by WSLCB Director of Legislative Relations before Murphy’s remarks to the committee.

• Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Cleanup and Compliance Unit Supervisor Will Strand provided updates on a DDE contamination budget proviso, university research on the topic, and a timeline for remaining actions (audio - 10m, video - TVW, presentation).
  • Strand explained that after DDE contamination was discovered in Okanogan County, the legislature appropriated funds to assist the WSDA with testing for DDE and to help businesses remediate contaminated soil. He indicated that DOE’s Toxic Cleanup program had received $5 million and been asked by elected officials for several actions:
    • “Implement a program to remediate soil in Okanogan County that has produced cannabis that exceeded LCB state action levels for DDT.”
    • Coordination with WSLCB and WSDA counterparts.
    • “Provide a status report to the legislature by December 1 of 2024.”
  • DOE cleanup officials had been meeting with the other agencies and the farmers involved, and Strand noted “we chose to approach the project in three main areas:”
    • In coordination with the Center for Cannabis Policy, Research, and Outreach (WSU CCPRO), “a research laboratory at Washington State University” would look into “how, when and where cannabis plants absorb or uptake DDT from the soil. Currently, this is an unknown process in the cannabis plant…this work was funded for approximately $720,000.”
      • He stated the study was “progressing well, “preliminary results indicating that DDT and its remnants move upward through the plant stem through growth, which makes sense.” 
    • “Secondly, we hired an environmental consultant to determine the viability of several different soil remediation methods…that includes excavation and removal of contaminated soil, the mixing of contaminated soil with clean soil, capping in place, consolidation and capping of the contaminated soil, and then finally bioremediation of the contaminated soil…the consultant is also performing a literature review to look for any existing scholarly or research work that's already been performed in the United States that may help us, and Ecology funded this feasibility study for up to $92,000.”
      • The feasibility study remained “on track, we recently expanded the scope slightly to account for some lessons learned from our soils grant agreement,” said Strand.
    • Lastly, the bulk of the allocated funds—$3.8 million—”will bring new soil to the affected farms. In that we partnered with the Okanogan Conservation District and the Washington Soils Conservation Commission for this grant, and we really appreciate their expertise.”
      • Strand told the committee: “we found several possible sources of new soil so far, unfortunately, none of them have worked out yet. It's such a large volume of soil that it has been a challenge to find farming quality soil and get it there while safeguarding areas with potential cultural resources as well as satisfying regulatory requirements…Okanogan Conservation District is continuing to work on it, and they will be soliciting bids to supply and deliver soil to both farms.”
  • Once the studies were completed and submitted to the relevant legislative committee, which Strand predicted would be in spring of 2025, they would continue managing the soil grant portion of their budget until the allocated money lapsed in July 2025. While a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) study and cultural resource reviews were underway, he suggested there were “some recommendations based on our early results.”
    • “Legacy pesticide concerns on agricultural land” weren’t new, Strand pointed out, but they were new to cannabis production. He said that DOE had been happy to contribute to the soil cleanup work, but “we suggest that [the] Department of Agriculture and LCB lead future efforts.”
    • “Results from the two studies should be used in future decision making, and we suggest identifying knowledge gaps that still exist,” he added.
    • “Continue to include the outdoor growing community in the regulatory processes, while also planning for…more potentially affected farmers…we've heard about possible issues such as mixing, blending and distribution of THC extracts, and also about possible impacts regarding pesticide regulatory thresholds in final products.”
  • Wrapping up, Strand indicated that he anticipated the university research to be completed in the spring of 2025 and for the RFP for DDE testing to be issued in the next couple of months.

• Committee members had questions for panelists related to carbon sequestration, plant toxicity, and existing agency authority.
  • Representative Kristine Reeves was curious if the report to lawmakers would have information or metrics on carbon sequestration in cannabis (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Strand answered that the scope of the proviso was limited to DDE and soil contamination, but “it's an interesting question."
  • Co-Chair Sharon Wylie remarked, “when this problem emerged, there was some confusion, at least on my part, on how much we really knew about…how much of this material is toxic.” This made her curious, “did more information about that emerge” when implementing the budget proviso? (audio - 2m, video - TVW)
    • Strand replied that DDT and DDE remnants could be taken up into plant structure, but that more information on the paths and concentrations in different parts of the plant would be published in their legislative report in December.
  • Reeves brought up Strand’s suggestion that WSLCB and WSDA take the lead on the subject, inquiring whether this would need action by the legislature, “like moving cannabis production to agriculture as a crop, for example” (audio - 2m, video - TVW).
    • Stand said her question “goes outside my knowledge base as the project manager.” He offered to “get back to” Reeves with a recommendation from DOE leadership. “The takeaway that I'm trying to share today is that we have great expertise in, in the Toxics Cleanup program [but] plants that are ingested, or products that are ingested is really…outside of our wheelhouse, and not something we have a lot of familiarity with,” making the other agencies with greater “direct regulatory authority” preferable to lead on the issue of product safety.
    • During the 2024 legislative session, Reeves was the primary sponsor of HB 2334, “Transferring certain cannabis licensing activities to the department of agriculture.”

Here are some observations from the Tuesday September 17th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Committee members were introduced to members of the Washington State Patrol (WSP) Cannabis Enforcement Response Team (CERT) which focused on enforcement actions against unlicensed entities (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Established in 2018, CERT handles investigations of illegal production, distribution, and diversion of cannabis from the legal market. They’ve partnered with Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) Enforcement Officers on investigations and police actions such as the 2022 emergency suspension of a retail license in Port Angeles.
    • WSP also conducts cannabis enforcement through continued participation in the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. Learn more from the DEA’s 2022 final statistical report on the program.
    • According to a 2023 report by the Washington State Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC), WSP received $11,133,729 between fiscal years 2019 and 2023 for cannabis enforcement, which it relayed had resulted in:
      • "Eradication of 233,437 illegal plants.
      • "280 arrests.
      • "179 weapons recovered."
      • The report also noted that among local governments receiving $200,000 or more in local cannabis revenue, five had indicated using the funds for local policing.
      • Learn more from a November 2023 committee briefing on the report.
  • WSP Captain Jason Ashley and Lieutenant Pete Stock spoke to CERT's activities. Ashley deferred most of the presentation to Stock who explained that initially CERT efforts were focused on eradication of illegal plants, but their mission shifted to targeting the criminal organizations that controlled illicit cannabis cultivation in Washington.

• WSP Lieutenant Pete Stock described the evolution of CERT from focusing on eradicating illegal cannabis plants to targeting the organizations behind illicit growing operations, and the challenges faced pursuing these investigations (audio - 16m, video - TVW, presentation).
  • Stock explained that CERT investigative approaches involved surveillance, intelligence gathering, partnerships with other agencies, and serving search warrants. CERT investigators “confirm that there's odor at a particular location” and obtained records like those for utilities, vehicles, or employment information, he elaborated. And along the way he said officers “de-conflict with the Liquor [and] Cannabis Board to ensure that they're unlicensed, and they’re partners with us.”
  • Stock presented information about the CERT team's work mapping the relationships and financial transactions of drug trafficking organizations to identify and disrupt their operations.
    • A typical CERT investigation involved multiple suspects, residences, and vehicles, which Stock suggested “becomes very complicated for us to investigate.” This meant that the intelligence gathering aspect of their work was critical to determining organizational hierarchies as well as creating visual representations of the complex relationships involved. Stock explained that illicit grow operations were usually not stand-alone operations and that his team had been using intelligence gathering techniques to understand how the different grow operations were connected. He stated, “I have yet to look at, or review an investigation that involves one house, one person, or one car. As soon as my detectives start to dig into this, they find multiple houses, multiple people, multiple cars.”
    • Stock presented a sanitized affiliation chart to the committee that depicted the complex relationships that could exist between illicit grow operations. He indicated this was an example of the “smallest” affiliation chart his team has produced.
    • A recent change at CERT was that a team member had been studying financial forensic accounting methods to try to uncover the sources of funding for illicit cannabis grow operations. Their work was helping CERT follow the money and learn more about how these grow operations were being funded, Stock told lawmakers. He also mentioned that the culmination of many investigations involved warrants being served, a process where “not three or four people from the State Patrol or from any law enforcement entity that just drives to a residence to serve a search warrant on one person, these are large scale operations…overseeing 35 to 40 people” at a time.
    • One challenge was that most people working at a grow operation knew little about the wider criminal organization it was a part of, reported Stock. Many didn’t speak English, and he noted that even his analysts who could speak different languages were rarely able to get much useful intel about the larger organizations running the grow operations. Calling the financial resources of such groups “considerable,” he stressed that shutting down one grow house was not enough to deter these organizations, who would just restart their operations elsewhere.
  • Stock told the committee that illicit cannabis production had largely transitioned from large outdoor grow operations to smaller indoor grow houses over the past two years.
    • Stock explained that more illicit grow operations had shifted to indoor facilities which could produce cannabis year-round rather than seasonally to increase profits. Stock said, “Over the past two years, when we first started this…it was acres and acres of outdoor growth. We have transitioned, growing cannabis has now gone indoors.” He estimated indoor setups could earn criminal organizations approximately $1.4 million per month from 1,000 plants. Cannabis produced at the grow houses was most often transported to other states where adult use of cannabis remained prohibited.
      • Washington state’s position as an illicit cannabis exporter wasn’t new. Prior to commercial legalization, the 2008 Northwest High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (NW HIDTA) Drug Market Analysis designated the state ‘M7,’ a top marijuana producer with involvement from domestic and international drug trafficking organizations, information which was subsequently reiterated in a 2010 HIDTA report to Congress. 
    • According to Stock, indoor grow houses posed a significant hazard to law enforcement officers due to structural instability, black mold, and the use of hazardous chemicals. Environmental and security risks required significant effort “to ensure that our people are doing this safely.” Moreover, he pointed out that the chemicals found in grow houses could be particularly dangerous, alleging some could cause a person to “lose 50% of [their] lung capacity, just like that.” Stock said that his team partners with the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “specifically the California EPA”, to learn more about the hazardous chemicals. Dangers from indoor operations were so great, Stock remarked, “we…may not always eradicate these plants. If we identify it's too dangerous or there's too much at stake and putting our personnel at risk, we will use other means to disrupt but it may not mean going in and exposing ourselves to these plants.”
    • To adapt to the hazards posed by indoor grow houses, CERT had partnered with WSP SWAT when executing warrants, explained Stock. He added that CERT investigators were receiving specialized training to mitigate the hazards posed by the grows. But policing plants had proved to be “way bigger than we are, for six detectives and one supervisor. So criminality has now become our focus, and not so much the plants,” he argued. CERT also partnered with local law enforcement agencies in jurisdictions where they were taking actions, whom Stock claimed could be unaware of the hazards they might encounter.
    • Views on cannabis cultivation among Washington law enforcement has been complex, given the state is one of the few with an adult use market to continue criminalizing personal cannabis grows. Since voters legalized in 2012 there has been interest in approving limited adult cultivation in state task forces, by cannabis advocates and the industry, and in the legislature.
  • Stock concluded with an outline of CERT's vision for the future, stating that the unit would be focusing on investigating financial aspects of the organizations in addition to continuing to disrupt unlicensed cannabis production operations.

• Legislators on the committee had several inquiries around interstate and local law enforcement cooperation, human trafficking, CERT’s caseload, and long term strategies to disrupt the illicit cannabis sector in Washington.
  • Representative Melanie Morgan asked about interstate cooperation related to investigation of cannabis diversion outside of the state (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Ashley replied that the WSP generally assists local agencies with their investigations and does not take a lead role in cases that originate outside of Washington state.
    • “We have partnerships with the DEA and our narcotics task forces,” Stock observed, but “I don't know the specific national organizational structure as it relates to cannabis.”
  • Co-Chair Sharon Wylie wondered whether local law enforcement agencies “automatically coordinate” with WSP regarding illicit grows. Ashley responded that the WSP was regularly contacted by local agencies to assist with investigations which he attributed to the environmental dangers posed by cannabis grows (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • The coordination wasn’t automatic, Stock noted, but he argued it was “really dangerous for agencies now to just react and respond to these calls without knowing what they're walking into.”
    • Wylie asked for additional information about the number of requests for assistance the unit received from other agencies. Stock explained that they do not specifically track this and he would need to get additional information from his staff to respond to Wylie’s question.
    • Ashley added that the WSP is partnering with DOE and the Washington State Office of the Attorney General (WA OAG) to investigate the environmental offenses associated with illicit grow operations and to “prosecute those environmental crimes, because they create an ecological impact to our communities, runoff ditches, our drainage situations.” 
  • Wylie then asked "are the workers in these grow houses being essentially trafficked?" (audio - 2m, video - TVW)
    • During his presentation, Stock had commented “The other challenge that we've been facing over the years is that when we go to these residences….people who tend to grow, have very little information about the criminal organization that they are working for.”
    • In response to Wylie’s comment, Stock replied, "Yes, I would say they are victims, and they are being labor trafficked from overseas.” He went on to explain that workers were often “not paid, and they have to stay there and tend to this cannabis grow,” suggesting a possible reason those arrested at grow houses only had minimal information about the criminal organizations exploiting them. This was another aspect of their work which made criminality “become our focus, and not so much the plants.”
    • Challenges associated with criminally-run grows that relied on trafficked labor also came up during a 2022 work group meeting on personal cannabis cultivation policy.
  • Wylie also inquired about CERT's annual caseload. Stock estimated that “with just five detectives, [CERT investigated] maybe between 10 to 15 cases a year,” reiterating “these investigations are highly complex, and when you look at that affiliation chart it is considerable resources and time to even do one” (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
  • Morgan asked WSLCB Legislative Relations Director Marc Webster—who’d also presented during the meeting—about the agency's ideas to “temper” illicit cannabis markets (audio - 1m, video - TVW).
    • Webster replied that the WSLCB valued its partnerships with law enforcement agencies and believed that addressing illicit cannabis markets required “a multi-pronged approach because I think we're seeing a variety of ways that the illicit market operates.”
  • Co-Chair Shelley Kloba wanted to know how a person could report "that weird house down the street" to CERT if they suspected it as being operated by a criminal organization (audio - 2m, video - TVW).
    • “If it's an emergency and there's a true environmental impact or something that's occurring right there, 911” was appropriate, Ashley said. For anything less definitive he advised contacting their local Crime Stoppers of Washington or reporting to the WSP directly.