UPDATE: There is already language prepared to address issues people are typically stating/mentioned in the article such as THC limits. Advocacy groups are calling to hear from people that the smokable hemp production and sales ban needs to be rectified. They further state if you own a shop selling smokable, here is your time to testify. As well, that products sold in Texas should be tested in Texas, 3rd party testing, and a system of audit rules for lab testing in Texas similar to that DSHS has for other programs. Texas Hemp Industries Association is already looking into the existing language for that to keep things consistent.
Rep Tracy King (D) filed HB 3948 March 11, which relates to the production and regulation of hemp and consumable hemp products; providing administrative penalties; imposing and authorizing fees; creating a criminal offense.
Texas residents who wish to electronically submit comments related to agenda items on this notice without testifying in person can do so until the hearing is adjourned by visiting: https://comments.house.texas.gov/home?c=c020
Learn how to become a medical cannabis patient in Texas
The meeting will be held Thursday April 8, 2021 at 8 AM at the Texas State Capital.
Coleman Hemphill of the Texas Hemp Industries Association provided his thoughts on the bill filed.
“Some concerns exist with new language for “trace cannabinoids” that seemingly seeks to step in where the FDA has been mute on acceptable dosing limits for hemp products , which if passed, could put Texas at a disadvantage compared to other states,” Hemphill stated
Research institutions and universities benefitting
HB 3948 will give any higher institution of learning a license, with no fee, if said institution requests a license to study hemp. It will waive them from following other established rules along with eliminating crop lot permits and their associated fees.
(1) is not required to pay a fee collected by the department under this chapter;
(2) is not required to obtain from the department a lot
crop permit or other permit for each location where hemp is grown;
(3) is not required to obtain preharvest testing under
Section 122.153 before harvesting plants, except as provided by
Subsection (c);
(4) may use hemp seed and cultivate and handle plants
grown from seed that is not certified or approved under Section
122.252; and
(5) is not subject to Section 122.403(c) or (d).
The bill will also extend the amount of time allowed from the preharvest sample to harvest, from 20 days to 30 days. From there it will allow an individual with a license revoked after planting, the ability to harvest the plants if they are within the standard 0.3 D9 THC limit.
Hemphill noted, “Also, included in the Health and Safety code is a provision that would allow for up to “1% total THC” for finished products. This move would be a scientifically well founded boon for farmers and finished product manufacturers, but the current language could limit Delta-8 and Delta-10 THC products that have been quickly gaining in popularity.”
Seedlings and immature plant language are also added to address issues in the current marketplace. The language addresses the definition of these plants, importing seedlings and immature plants, along with providing the plants to other licensed growers under specific conditions.
Licensed hemp farmers will also have objective limits as to what can cause them to lose their license. The new bill states that a license holder may not receive more than one negligent violation of the same kind per growing season. Farmers without licenses will be able to receive a written warning or stiffer penalties if the department sees fit.
THC content limits
King’s bill will set maximum THC limits that follow the USDA rules considering total THC content adapted recently. The total THC content will be allowed to go to 1% instead of the previous 0.5%.
Sec. 443.006. MAXIMUM TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL CONTENT. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, a person may not process, manufacture, possess, transport, sell, or purchase a consumable hemp product in this state that:
(1) has a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis;
(2) has a total tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of more than one percent on a dry weight basis;
(3) exceeds any federal limit; or
(4) has been adulterated with additional tetrahydrocannabinol or synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol.
(b) For purposes of Subsection (a), the total tetrahydrocannabinol concentration includes all isomers, acids, compounds, and other forms of tetrahydrocannabinol and shall be determined without any adjustment for a measurement of uncertainty in a test result.
Read more about Delta-8 in Texas
The language here is putting in place a limit on how much a consumable hemp product can have regarding THC content of any analog/isomer. This means that a D8 hemp cartridge could be a 1% max limit under Texas law. This language regarding adulterated substances would also mean that hemp flower could not be sprayed any THC analog/isolate onto hemp flower. This equates to no more D8 sprayed hemp flower products.
Robert Head of Blue Cord Farms had a very interesting perspective to add as a farm owner and licensed hemp grower. Robert pointed out to TCC that having a rule of 1% across the entire Texas industry isn’t too fitting.
“At first glance, increasing the THC limit is good, but it should only apply at the farmer level. The processing level runs on a different set of economic rules. Farmers selling seed and grain, it’s fine. Processing for cannabinoids requires chemicals and added costs that you don’t have in fiber processing. So why have the same set of rules for every stage of a different business environment? Does that make sense? While it may be fine for the fiber/seeds guys and the fiber processors like me, it hurts retail and CBD processors. That’s not very fair,” Head stated on the topic.
Fraud and false advertising
c) A person who sells, offers for sale, or distributes a consumable hemp product that the person claims is made in this state commits a false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice actionable under Subchapter E, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code, if the product contains any hemp that was not grown and processed in this state by license holders under Chapter 122, Agriculture Code and Chapter 443, Health and Safety Code.
And a big touch at the end of the bill is that any product to claim to be made or grown in Texas must have been so. If not this creates a legal offense by the seller for doing so. A product such as a smokable product cannot claim to be made in Texas (which is legal only under TRO in Texas right now) when it was actually manufactured in Colorado and then shipped to Texas.
Hemphill finalized his point on this bill stating, “Much debate is still to be had as we move through the 87th and we will see if Texas decides to seek future guidance from the Federal government or go-it-alone into unchartered regulatory waters that could have unintended consequences for the Texas hemp industry.”
This bill does not address the smokable hemp manufacturing legality issues, nor does it address the sale of smokable hemp products in the state of Texas. The Senate version of this bill is SB 1778.