WA House RSG - Committee Meeting
(March 20, 2023) - SB 5367 - Executive Session

Promising continued work with hemp sector stakeholders, committee members were clear the priority for a THC regulation bill was to prevent youth from accessing products containing the compound.

Here are some observations from the Monday March 20th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

• Agency request legislation on the regulation of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), SB 5367, was overwritten by a striking amendment which resurrected a definition of “hemp consumable,” required a “detectable” testing standard, allowed federally-approved products, and explicitly prohibited synthesized cannabinoids among other changes (audio - 2m, video).
  • The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) request legislation was approved by the Washington State Senate (WA Senate) on March 2nd as an engrossed second substitute version which removed language defining ‘hemp consumable’ and classified  “any product with any amount” of THC as ‘cannabis products.’ 
  • WA House RSG members heard the bill on March 13th. Supporters recognized difficulty in setting a level of THC that could be reliably detected or confirmed absent by labs and expressed concerns over the inclusion of synthesized cannabinoids. The Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) representative stated they believed the bill would lead to a drop off in license renewals that would “render our program insolvent.”
  • Ahead of the executive session, committee counsel Peter Clodfelter described the impacts of a striking amendment proposed by Representative Kristine Reeves:
    • (1) Adds a definition of the term "hemp consumable" to hemp statutes. Defines the term as a product that is sold or provided to another person, that is: (a) Made of hemp; (b) not a cannabis product; and (c) intended to be consumed or absorbed inside the body by any means, including inhalation, ingestion, or insertion.
    • (2) Modifies the proposed change to the existing definition of the term "cannabis products" in the Uniform Controlled Substances Act (UCSA), so the definition would include any product intended to be consumed or absorbed inside the body by any means including inhalation, ingestion, or insertion, with any detectable amount of THC (instead of with any amount of THC).
    • (3) Also excludes products that are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration from the definition of the term "cannabis products" in the UCSA.
    • (4) Removes the proposed new definition of "tetrahydrocannabinol" or "THC," and the proposed change to the existing definition of "isomer" in the UCSA.
    • (5) Prohibits synthetic cannabinoids from being used as additives in cannabis products, instead of requiring the label on a cannabis product package to include the amount of any synthetically derived CBD in a product.
    • (6) Prohibits the production, processing, manufacturing, or sale of any cannabinoid that is synthetically derived or completely synthetic, except for products approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration.
    • (7) Adds a severability clause.

• Once the bill was moved, Co-Chair Sharon Wylie called for discussion on the proposed bill changes and many members made clear their priority was reducing youth access to products containing THC.
  • Setting out the thinking behind her striking amendment changes, Reeves explained “stakeholders have spent an exceptional amount of time working together” while acknowledging her amendment “doesn't facilitate meeting everyone's needs in this process, but I think gets fairly close.” She brought up “work ahead” on laboratory requirements and ensuring “that we get these products inside the regulated market.” Reeves’ intent for the amendment was to get “products that can get kids high out of convenience stores, out of consumer access points” and into a “regulated market in a way that's going to help us prevent those unintended consequences” (audio - 1m, video).
  • Ranking Minority Member Kelly Chambers immediately concurred with Reeves’ intention to get “intoxicating products that are currently available in stores all around the state out of the hands of kids.” She wanted to thwart “any more situations where we have middle…school students overdosing because they're eating a package of something that looks like candy.” Chambers remarked that the amendment could eventually result in laboratory personnel eventually having a “definition of detectable amounts of THC,” while also aligning with “what voters passed in the initiative to legalize cannabis.” Finding that hemp consumables were “intoxicating and I don't think most of the public is aware of that,” she mentioned parents who’d raised “concern[s] about kids overdosing; the impact that fentanyl is having on the streets” in meetings she’d attended. Chambers believed the changes reflected higher “awareness” and “help[ed] move those products to the proper” age-restricted stores (audio - 1m, video).
  • Co-Chair Shelley Kloba "applaud[ed] all the work on this bill," remembering the “frustration” during a 2022 attempt to pass cannabinoid request legislation. She said the situation had arisen due to the 2018 federal Farm Bill which “created this gray area, this loophole” and felt “the federal government seems in no hurry to address it.” Kloba concurred that “intoxicating products belong in [Initiative] 502 and we understand that there can be some hardship there for the hemp industry, but just wanted to remind folks…we do have the opportunity for hemp-based CBD to come into the market.” She recommended a yes vote, partly because hemp licensees had paths for “intellectual property selling that into a 502 licensee, producer or…unlike the…502 licenses, who cannot sell outside of the borders of this state, hemp does already have that opportunity.” Kloba promised to “continue to work on other opportunities for hemp because we do want that business side to succeed” (audio - 2m, video).
  • Assistant Ranking Minority Member Eric Robertson “thank[ed] folks for educating us when this was first presented. It was quite confusing to me. It was very complex.” Thanks to public testimony and his fellow committee members, Robertson had “gotten to a place whereof I can make an informed decision” to back the amendment (audio - 1m, video).
  • Representative Melanie Morgan conveyed she’d be a “very soft ‘no’ on the amendment, “it's an exclusion in terms of the hemp industry, and I would have liked to see that where we could have all met somewhere in the middle, and made both sides happy.” However, she wanted the committee, in addition to “three of us being on the [Washington State House Agriculture and Natural Resources] committee,” to “take a deeper dive into hemp” in the future. She agreed the topic was “very complex, very deep, and trying to understand” and a balance of all the interests involved hadn’t been achieved (audio - 1m, video).
  • Wylie looked ahead, finding “we have our work cut out for us after the session….this is one of the top things that we need to talk about.” The overlap with members on the agricultural committee “helps, we have relationships with a lot of stakeholders, and I think we're going to continue to work hard” (audio - <1m, video).
  • When the vote was taken, Morgan was the sole dissenting voice vote on the amendment (audio - 1m, video).

• During final remarks before the committee passed the amended SB 5367, two members promised to work with hemp stakeholders but confirmed that the cannabinoid bill was about keeping THC content, regardless of source, in the licensed and taxed adult use market.
  • Reeves remarked that what "started as a complicated question for me" had become clear after talking with her colleagues and stakeholders (audio - 2m, video).
    • “This bill does not negate the work that we need to do in helping elevate and support the hemp industry in our state, but that's not really what this bill is about. This bill is really about making sure that as a parent, I know that there are not substances in my community, and my grocery store, in my convenience store, that my kids can get access to because they look like candy, because they look like something fun to eat.”
    • This reflected her view of the “underlying work that I think my community has sent me here to do.” Even as she didn’t “want to negate the fact that we have a lot more work to do in the hemp industry, in supporting them in their work,” she asked for a ‘yes’ vote.
  • Chambers seconded the sentiment that “there is still work to do with the hemp…industry,” but “there are pathways for them to participate in the 502 marketplace.” She argued that “now that we have a better understanding of where we are with this bill…that sets the stage…for next steps and what we can do in those other arenas” (audio - 1m, video).
  • During the final vote on SB 5367, Morgan and Representative Jim Walsh voted without recommendation (audio - 1m, video).
    • Given a fiscal note estimating over a half million dollars in costs over the first biennium after implementation, the bill would likely be referred for a fiscal committee hearing by the Washington State House Appropriations Committee.

Information Set