WA House RSG - Committee Meeting
(January 15, 2024) - HB 2151 - Public Hearing

2024-01-15 - WA House RSG - Committee Meeting - HB 2151 - Public Hearing - Takeaways
[ Event Details ]

Legislation to alter a planned transfer of cannabis lab accreditation authority was broadly praised by the sponsor, agency leaders, and cannabis sector stakeholders. 

Here are some observations from the Monday January 15th Washington State House Regulated Substances and Gaming Committee (WA House RSG) Committee Meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

  • WA House RSG Counsel Peter Clodfelter provided lawmakers a briefing on HB 2151, “Reassigning the accreditation of private cannabis testing laboratories from the department of ecology to the department of agriculture” (audio - 2m, Video - TVW).
    • In 2019, legislators passed a law that would move accreditation of cannabis testing laboratories from the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) to the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) by July of 2024. In 2022, subsequent legislation incorporated additional modifications and established the Cannabis Lab Accreditation Standards Program (CLASP). Led by WSDA, the group included representatives from WSLCB and the Washington State Department of Health (DOH).
    • After organizing CLASP, WSDA officials came to feel they were better positioned to accredit labs testing cannabis as a commodity, which their department already did for other crops. By contrast, DOE staff primarily accredited environmental-focused labs. In the fall of 2023, WSDA staff had begun to draft an agency request bill to take over cannabis lab accreditation. During remarks to WA House RSG members in December 2023, DOE leadership offered no objection to the move.
    • In the hearing, Clodfelter reviewed the bill analysis, and explained that HB 2151:
      • Reassigns agency authority and responsibility for accreditation of cannabis testing laboratories to the Department of Agriculture (WSDA), effective July 1, 2024.
      • Grants the WSDA authority for expedited rulemaking to accomplish the reassignment of authority and responsibility.
      • Modifies authorization related to the fee that may be imposed for the administration of the cannabis laboratory accreditation program.
        • Clodfelter said the fee language in statute would be modified to “transfer the authority to determine, assess, and collect the fee to the Department of Agriculture,” plus had been reworded to make the fee “intended to support, instead of to be ‘sufficient to cover,’ the direct and indirect costs of implementing the lab accreditation program.”
        • Additionally, he reported the bill included “direct and indirect costs of implementing the lab quality standards program to the authorization for this fee,” and removed “some requirements like that the initial program development costs for the lab accreditation be fully paid from the dedicated cannabis account.”
    • Co-Chair Shelley Kloba checked with Clodfelter to see what agency had responsibility for enforcement under the bill. “As I read the bill it would be [WSDA] that would be…saying the lab meets or does not meet the accreditation…so they would have enforcement authority in that sense over the labs” (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
  • Representative Kristine Reeves, the prime sponsor of the measure, explained her intent to increase efficiencies as the State redefined quality expectations for all cannabis testing labs (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
    • HB 2151 did “a couple of things,” said Reeves. First it continued “to ensure, ultimately, consumer protection because that's really what lab accreditation is about.”
    • Next, “it ensures a streamlining of government…making sure that…the work of getting to accreditation” was completed in “a streamlined, effective, and efficient manner.” She argued WSDA “already does that work” with other crops.
    • Reeves anticipated consensus on the need for HB 2151, asking “wholeheartedly for your support in passing this bill out of the committee.”
  • Public comment was entirely supportive, with state agency and industry representatives agreeing a transition would lead to better cannabis testing oversight.
    • Annette Hoffmann, DOE Environmental Assessment Program Manager (audio - 1m,  Video - TVW)
      • Telling lawmakers DOE supported the bill, Hoffmann said “laboratory accreditation plays a key role in consumer protections.” The former lead for the Cannabis Science Task Force, she stated the group’s two reports had “stronger recommendations,” but WSDA was better situated for the role “because cannabis and environmental science have different needs and support systems.” Hoffmann concluded WSDA was “well suited to implement the recommendations of the Cannabis Science Task Force and this program.”
    • Lukas Hunter, Harmony Farms Director of Compliance and Government Affairs (audio - 2m, Video - TVW).
      • Regarding labs in the cannabis sector as having been “only in a state of attrition…it's extremely costly,” Hunter said the minor change in the language of administrative fees was a “huge” improvement. A lab they did business with anticipated paying “half a million dollars under the current statute, or the estimate at least it would be around…$71,400 a year. That's about one month's revenue for one of our labs.” Hunter didn’t want “that entire weight” to be carried by labs alone, which he felt would push more out of business. Low testing costs and “all the benefits of standardization” were reasons he hoped to see the bill get passed by committee members.
    • Trecia Ehrlich, WSDA Cannabis Programs Manager (audio - 3m, Video - TVW)
      • Starting off by clarifying the enforcement aspect of accreditation, Ehrlich said her department would be giving an “accreditation recommendation” to WSLCB, but the latter agency would still have enforcement responsibilities over lab investigations “out of the scope for the WSDA.” She indicated this enforcement arrangement had been in place for the DOE transfer as well.
      • “The cannabis industry generates one billion dollars each year,” Ehrlich commented, which made testing labs “a public health necessity that protects Washingtonians and visitors from pesticides, residual solvents, and beyond.” Funding for CLASP had helped WSDA to acquire "important talent,” she observed, including “two chemists and a microbiologist who have already developed relationships with our stakeholders and the interagency staff at the LCB and DOH.”
      • Ehrlich noted DOE draft rules were underway, giving “language infrastructure” WSDA staff could use for expedited rulemaking. She then identified “three major distinctions from how Ecology planned” to accredit labs:
        • “One, we would have significantly reduced fees that would keep accreditation fees within a similar range to what they are right now for labs.
        • “Two, we have an allowance for using…the hemp matrix in proficiency testing when cannabis is not available as is currently the [c]ase, and that should ease the burden on labs” and allow them to get “full accreditation rather than a waiver to accreditation.”
        • “The final difference is that we will not immediately accredit labs to different matrices, ecology has plans to a credit for flower, intermediate, and end products.” But given that cannabis products were “extremely diverse from an analytical perspective… we would like to work with our partners at LCB and DOH, as well as our stakeholders, the [Initiative] 502 licensees and labs, to figure out the best way to divide these matrices.”
      • “Our team at WSDA would like the opportunity to continue to work to consider issues like in-matrix proficiency testing, accrediting by matrix, and other issues that help make labs stronger and products safer,” Ehrlich concluded.
      • Kloba asked whether CLASP would do more “refining” of the standards and accreditation rules. Ehrlich answered “the way I see it is…we've experienced a global pandemic since then the economy has changed quite a bit. And so some of these issues really…just need more time and I think our stakeholders’...views have changed on it with the changing environment as well.” She argued any changes were about giving “those options due diligence and support” (audio - 1m,  Video - TVW).
      • Reeves wondered if Ehrlich meant the transition period would take longer. Ehrlich stressed that wasn’t the case, but task force members had “wanted to uncover, do we accredit to different matrices, or how do we…get cannabis in our state to do proficiency testing, and we don't have those answers yet.” WSDA was prepared to “accredit the labs in a similar fashion to how they're being accredited today, but we know that the industry wants more…and we need time to explore that” (audio - 1m,  Video - TVW).
      • Ranking Minority Member Kelly Chambers wanted to know if a transition would result in “speedier accreditation so…producer/processors could get product to market sooner…or at a lower cost.” Ehrlich responded that accreditation happened at “regular intervals” and while labs might not be accredited faster than before, there was sufficient WSDA staff so “there wouldn't be a service gap and there would be more resources to make sure that…laboratories got what they needed when they needed it” (audio - 1m, Video - TVW).
    • Nick Mosely, Confidence Analytics Co-Founder (audio - 1m, Video - TVW)
      • Calling the bill a “very convenient simplification" of lab accreditation, Mosely pointed out that the standard methods from WSDA “represent a pretty significant ratcheting of increased quality and complexity for the work that the laboratories do.” While he was confident that the quality department at his lab would hold his team to the standards, he’d seen “other cannabis laboratories routinely bend or break the rules to cut corners and cut costs in ways that put consumers at risk and put good, honest businesses at a disadvantage.” Mosely promised to work with lawmakers to see that WSDA was allotted the “funding and the staff that they need to dutifully carry out the requirements of this legislation.”
    • Caitlein Ryan, The Cannabis Alliance Executive Director (audio - 3m, Video - TVW)
      • Grateful to WSDA for “their effort to quickly meet this need in the 11th hour of a multi-year project,” Ryan regarded HB 2151 as both “filling a regulatory gap” while also improving “the accreditation program with regard to a more sensible and appropriate fee structure.” She further felt the “expedited timeline to meet important deadlines” was another benefit of the bill, calling for the department to “double the efforts in notification to stakeholders along the way to ensure the speed of the project does not diminish the quality of the resulting rule.”
      • Wanting some revisions to the bill, Ryan suggested that Section 2(4) contained a “discrepancy” between rule and law, where the statute claimed if a sample “does not meet [quality assurance] standards the entire lot from which the sample was taken must be destroyed.” She contrasted this with WAC 314-55-102, which “does allow for remediation following a failed test.” She advised modifying the RCW to match the WAC language.
      • Believing the bill “does not exactly contemplate the role of enforcement,” Ryan was encouraged by the questions on the topic raised by committee members. She then highlighted “the necessity of meaningful collaboration within CLASP so that enforcement following program implementation would remain a dual responsibility between LCB and WSDA.”
      • “In the spirit of improving on an already good bill,” Ryan asked for an additional “full-time employee who has already qualified in accreditation.” Her hope was to “see enough support to bolster a quality outcome in this compressed timeline…such an individual could be critical in the rapid implementation of a quality program of accreditation” at WSDA.
      • In addition to the five people testifying, seven individuals registered their support of HB 2151. Scott Waller, Washington Association for Substance Misuse and Violence Prevention (WASAVP) Member, signed in as “other” on the bill without offering comment (Testifying, Not Testifying).

Information Set