2

**2018 Farm Bill Implementation Listening Session on Hemp************Submitted****Pursuant to****AMS-SC-19-0020-001; FR 2019****-03912******

******Re:****Oral comments for 3/1****3****/19****AMS****online listening session****on hemp******

****Jessica Anne Wasserman

Greenspoon Marder, on behalf of Pacific Northwest Hemp Coalition/Lazarus Naturals

Partner

700 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, 2nd FloorWashington DC 20003

Thank you to AMS for all of your hard work on this exciting new program for the American hemp industry.

AMS has asked for comments on “how USDA can partner with agriculture agencies representing states to implement a nationwide program for overseeing the production of industrial hemp.”

We encourage USDA to work closely with states such as Oregon and Washington-- states which have long term experience with hemp programs. 

One of the key issues is the testing of hemp for being at or below 0.3 THC percent dry weight basis.  Hemp is a biomass and testing results will vary according to when the hemp is tested.   The THC level may go up slightly between the time tested and shipped or marketed, and USDA must set a testing date and protocol taking this into account.  Keep in mind that the THC level variation is slight and does NOT move the hemp product into the range of being psychoactive or able to make a user “high”.      USDA must set a testing date that is reasonable, so that once the product is certified on that date certification is final without retesting.  Congress in the 2018 Farm Bill recognized this reality about hemp testing when it set out that any negligent testing variation calls for an opportunity for corrective action and “shall not result in any criminal enforcement action by the Federal Government or any State government, Tribal government or local government.”  Clearly, Congress intended that minor variations are to be expected and cannot be criminally enforced.   For example, Oregon tests hemp 27 days prior to harvest and this would be a good national standard.   Once the hemp is tested and certified, the product cannot subject to re-testing, as otherwise the grower would be subject to a moving- target- approach that would lead to confusion and not be in accord with the 2018 Farm Bill and Congressional intent. 

We note that setting a firm testing date and certification protocol will prevent the situation of Oregon biomass being inappropriately stopped when transshipped across neighboring states, a situation in direct contravention of the plain meaning of the 2018 Farm Bill and the intent of Congress. 

When issuing its regulation and reviewing state plans, we request that USDA/AMS keep in mind the business realities of hemp production and the expenses that will result from over regulation.   The goal of any regulations should be to make hemp an agricultural commodity treated similarly to any other agricultural commodity.  Complicated testing and recordkeeping requirements will add expense and stifle what is now a promising new American industry. 

In general, we request that the USDA play the role of moving hemp toward a dynamic, profitable and job creating **national** industry.  Under the new Farm Bill program, USDA has the role of approving state plans and establishing a federal plan.   As such, USDA can drive national standards for the industry. 

We would be honored to be a resource for you with regard to an industry perspective on the long -standing hemp industry in the Pacific Northwest.