An Examination of the USDA Hemp Production Program (U.S. House Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research)

Hearing	An Examination of the USDA Hemp Production Program
Committee	U.S. House Committee on Agriculture, Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research
Date	July 28, 2022

Hearing Takeaways:

• The Current U.S. Hemp Landscape: The hearing focused on the U.S.’s current hemp landscape and how the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was implementing the U.S. Domestic Hemp Production Program. Subcommittee Members and the hearing’s witnesses highlighted how the U.S. hemp industry had been revivified in recent years following reforms made in the Agricultural Act of 2014 (also known as the 2014 Farm Bill) and the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (also known as the 2018 Farm Bill). Prior to these laws, hemp had been considered a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act and had therefore been illegal. Subcommittee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed interest in the wide variety of potential uses for hemp, including (but not limited to) food, industrial materials, and cannabidiol (CBD).
  • Initial Boom and Bust in Hemp Production: Commissioner Quarles and Commissioner Greenberg both highlighted how there had occurred a spike in hemp production between 2015 and 2019 followed by a decrease in hemp production that had begun during the 2020 growing season. They attributed this decrease to overproduction and various regulatory burdens being imposed on hemp producers. 
  • Trend Towards More Intoxicating Products: Mr. Wang discussed how some struggling farmers and businesses had pivoted towards marketing intoxicating products, such as Delta-8 THC. He remarked that a clear regulatory pathway for CBD would relieve the economic pressure that was pushing farmers and businesses towards more intoxicating products and help to ensure that products did not contain intoxicating hemp ingredients.
  • Opportunities for Combatting Climate Change: Full Committee Ranking Member Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) expressed interest in how hemp could be used to combat climate change. Mr. Wang highlighted how his hemp was a carbon negative plant and noted how his company was developing hemp-based substance equivalents that will sequester carbon. Commissioner Greenberg remarked that hemp would play a key role in Colorado’s efforts to address climate change.
  • Opportunities for Socially Disadvantaged Hemp Producers and Researchers: Subcommittee Chairman Stacey Plaskett (D-VI), Rep. Al Lawson (D-FL), Dr. Phipps, and Mr. Grignon expressed interest in providing support for socially disadvantaged groups seeking to enter the hemp production and research space. Dr. Phipps contended that historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and minority serving institutions (MSIs) could support equitable finance and education opportunities for producers, farmers, and consumers from underprivileged backgrounds. Mr. Grignon recounted how the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) had unnecessarily interfered with his tribe’s hemp research and had failed to provide justification for its actions in the subsequent years.
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Implementation Efforts of the 2018 Farm Bill: Subcommittee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed general frustration with the FDA’s slow pace in terms of issuing guidances and rules for hemp and hemp-derived products.
  • FDA Policy Towards CBD: Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Baird (R-IN), Mr. Wang, and Commissioner Quarles called on the FDA to provide a regulatory framework for CBD. They stated that this absence of a framework had created uncertainty for CBD producers, manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. Mr. Wang noted however that FDA Commissioner Robert Califf had previously told Congress that the FDA’s abilities to regulate CBD were limited under current law. He requested that Congress provide the FDA with more authority to oversee and regulate the CBD space as part of the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.
  • Use of Hemp in Animal Feed: Subcommittee Ranking Member Baird, Dr. Phipps, and Commissioner Greenberg expressed interest in having the FDA approve the use of hemp in animal feed. Dr. Phipps noted how hemp could help boost the nutritional profile of animal products, which would in turn enhance human health.
  • Clarity Surrounding Floral Hemp Products: Mr. Grignon and Commissioner Quarles both requested additional FDA guidance on floral products derived from hemp. Mr. Grignon asserted that these products should be treated different than industrial hemp and CBD.
• Hemp Policy Proposals: Subcommittee Members and the hearing’s witnesses made various recommendations for improving the U.S.’s hemp policies and recommended specific pieces of legislation. They expressed hope that these recommendations would inform and be incorporated into the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.
  • The Hemp Advancement Act of 2022: Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) highlighted how she had introduced the Hemp Advancement Act of 2022, which would make a series of hemp policy reforms. Among the reforms, the legislation would eliminate a prohibition that prevents people with drug-related felony convictions from becoming hemp producers for ten years, remove requirements for testing laboratories to receive DEA approval, and increase the THC threshold for hemp from 0.3 percent to 1 percent. Mr. Wang, Mr. Grignon, Commissioner Quarles, and Commissioner Greenberg all expressed support for the various elements of this legislation.
  • The Hemp and Hemp-Derived CBD Consumer Protection and Market Stabilization Act of 2021: Mr. Wang expressed support for the Hemp and Hemp-Derived CBD Consumer Protection and Market Stabilization Act of 2021, which would provide the FDA with more authority to oversee and regulate the CBD space.
  • Bolstering Hemp Producer Access to Banking Services and Insurance: Mr. Grignon advocated for revising bank regulations to ease current restrictions on hemp operations. He added that hemp producers and processors also faced challenges in terms of accessing insurance.
  • Establishing a Federal Grant Program to Support State Hemp Programs: Commissioner Greenberg recommended that Congress create a federal grant program to support states that sought to establish their own hemp programs. Commissioner Quarles expressed receptiveness towards this proposal.
  • Promoting the Nutritional Values of Hemp: Rep. Shontel Brown (D-OH) and Dr. Phipps expressed interest in supporting federal efforts to increase consumer awareness around the nutrient benefits of hemp products. Dr. Phipps recommended that policymakers focus on curriculum building at the K-12 level as a means of promoting education about the nutrient benefits of hemp products. She commented that such educational efforts would help to combat chronic disease.
  • Providing a Hemp Grain and Fiber Exemption for Testing and Background Check Exemption Requirements: Mr. Grignon called for a grain and fiber exemption from testing and background check requirements for hemp producers. He indicated that such an exemption would be included in the soon-to-be-introduced Industrial Hemp Exemption Act of 2022.

Hearing Witnesses:

1. Dr. Brandy Phipps, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural & Life Sciences, Central State University
2. Mr. Marcus Grignon, Executive Director, Hempstead Project Heart
3. Mr. Eric Wang, Chief Executive Officer, Ecofibre, on behalf of U.S. Hemp Roundtable
4. Dr. Ryan F. Quarles, PhD, Commissioner, Kentucky Department of Agriculture
5. Ms. Kate Greenberg, Commissioner, Colorado Department of Agriculture

Member Opening Statements:

Subcommittee Chairman Stacey Plaskett (D-VI):

• She noted how hemp had been outlawed in the U.S. until recently as result of restrictions under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.
  • She indicated that this law had caused hemp to be treated the same way as marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act.
• She mentioned how the Agricultural Act of 2014 (also known as the 2014 Farm Bill) had removed longstanding federal restrictions on the cultivation and production of hemp.
  • She indicated that this law had permitted more state agriculture departments and institutions of higher learning to produce hemp for research purposes as part of a pilot program.
• She noted how the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (also known as the 2018 Farm Bill) had subsequently authorized commercial production of hemp and had authorized the USDA to establish the U.S. Domestic Hemp Production Program.
  • She explained that this legislation made the USDA responsible for cultivating and approving plans that were submitted to states, territories, or tribal authorities that wished to regulate hemp production.
• She mentioned how the USDA had issued its final ruling on regulating the U.S. production of hemp in January 2021.
  • She commented that public comments and lessons learned from previous growing seasons had helped to influence this rule.
• She stated that the USDA was continuing to conduct research and outreach to help support the “burgeoning” hemp sector.
• She discussed how small and local hemp producers in her territory had already taken advantage of the U.S. Domestic Hemp Production Program to provide a new source of revenue and additional jobs.
  • She asserted that the USDA’s guidance in this area could help her territory’s government, local farmers, and local entrepreneurs.
• She remarked that hemp production had created value for producers and consumers and mentioned how over 55,000 acres of hemp had been planted in 2021.
• She noted that while markets for hemp products (such as fiber, grain, and flour) were developing, she stated that these markets remained volatile and uncertain.
  • She called it crucial for the USDA to continue its efforts to support and expand hemp production and the U.S. hemp industry.

Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Baird (R-IN):

• He highlighted how the hearing was the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture’s first ever hearing on hemp issues.
• He noted that while the hearing would include diverse perspectives from state regulators, tribes, researchers, and industry, he lamented that the hearing would not include any witnesses from federal agencies.
  • He expressed his hope that the Subcommittee would hold a future hearing on hemp production featuring witnesses from the USDA and the FDA.
• He then expressed interest in learning about the innovation within the U.S. hemp sector following the 2018 Farm Bill.
  • He mentioned how newly identified uses for hemp included building materials, insulation, animal bedding, concrete, and car parts.
• He also highlighted how the rapid growth of the hemp industry had led to increased interest and research surrounding the use of hemp in animal feed.
  • He expressed particular interest in how the use of hemp in animal feed was being tested and whether any developments had been made in this area.
• He discussed how much of the hemp grown in the U.S. was being used to manufacture CBD and noted how the FDA had not yet provided a regulatory framework for CBD products.
  • He commented that this absence of a framework had created uncertainty for CBD producers, manufacturers, retailers, and consumers.
• He remarked however that the U.S. hemp industry faced many challenges and noted how there had occurred a significant decline in the number of hemp acres planted since 2019.
  • He called it “critical” for the Subcommittee to understand these challenges as it prepared to draft the 2023 Farm Bill.

Witness Opening Statements:

Dr. Brandy Phipps (Central State University):

• She mentioned how her hemp research had primarily focused on the plant’s nutritional and nutraceutical value for humans.
  • She testified that this research included an ongoing $1.3 million contract with the FDA that involved evaluating the chemical constituents of smoked and vaped hemp products.
  • She also mentioned her role as the project director of the USDA-funded Sustainable Use of a Safe Hemp Ingredient (SUSHI) project.
• She discussed how the U.S. was continuing to experience an increase in chronic diet-related conditions and stated that strategies to produce and increase the intake of healthy foods (such as hemp grain and fish) were critical for slowing the growth of chronic diseases.
• She remarked that the nascent U.S. hemp market needs diversification and a robust grain sector.
  • She commented that the aforementioned SUSHI project seeks to address both of these needs through investigating the use of hemp grain as a feeding ingredient for aquaculture systems.
• She stated that hemp grain had the potential to be an excellent domestic feed ingredient for many types of livestock given its nutrient density.
  • She commented that hemp hearts possessed a “healthy balance” of Omega-6 and Omega-3 fatty acids and easily digestible proteins.
  • She further noted how hemp constituted one of the few plant protein sources with sufficient levels of all of the essential amino acids needed by humans.
• She mentioned how hemp grain was already approved for use in animal feeds in Europe and noted how hemp hearts, protein, and seed oil had been established as safe for human consumption in the U.S.
• She remarked that the U.S. should explore ways to open up additional markets in the hemp sector and commented that such exploration could provide new grain markets for this sector and sustainable feeds.
  • She further noted how studies had found that incorporation of hemp into feeds might provide “key improvements” to the nutritional profile of animal products, which would in turn enhance human health.

Mr. Marcus Grignon (Hempstead Project Heart):

• He noted how his organization, Hempstead Project Heart, worked to redevelop hemp economies that connect tribal, urban, and rural communities.
• He recounted how hemp had previously been considered a cash crop from the U.S.’s founding through the passage of the Controlled Substances Act.
  • He noted how the Controlled Substances Act had defined hemp as a drug and non-useful and asserted that this definition was incorrect.
• He indicated that while hemp and marijuana were of the same family, he stated that these plants were different in nature.
• He recounted how hemp had historically played a “vital” role in the economies of many states and mentioned how the USDA had studied hemp extensively between 1902 and 1944 as a solution to fiber shortages.
  • He highlighted how this USDA research had found that three-quarters of the U.S. could grow hemp and that hemp grew well with crop rotations.
• He then discussed his personal experience as a hemp researcher and noted how his tribe had started growing hemp on its land for research purposes.
  • He indicated that this growing activity was authorized under Sec. 7606 of the 2014 Farm Bill and the guidance of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DoJ) Wilkinson Memorandum.
• He stated however that these efforts had been unsuccessful due to a DEA raid on his tribe’s hemp crop in October 2015.
  • He asserted that this raid was an overreach and testified that his tribe had never received the test results from the DEA proving that their hemp had contained illegal levels of THC.
• He mentioned how his organization had subsequently advocated for the legalization of hemp at the state and national levels and indicated that these efforts had led to the legalization of hemp as part of the 2018 Farm Bill.
• He requested that Congress build upon the protections for hemp included in the 2018 Farm Bill as it began to draft the 2023 Farm Bill.
  • He called for a separation between the definition and regulation of industrial hemp from cannabinoid and floral hemp and commented that these crops were easily differentiated with a visual inspection.
  • He also called for a grain and fiber exemption from testing and background checks for hemp producers and indicated that such an exemption would be included in the soon-to-be-introduced Industrial Hemp Exemption Act of 2022.
• He also advocated for revising bank regulations to ease current restrictions on hemp operations and noted how it was difficult for hemp producers and processors to access banking services.
  • He added that these hemp producers and processors also faced challenges accessing insurance.
• He further remarked that there needed to exist some form of USDA approval for hemp to be shipped across jurisdictions within the U.S.
• He stated that his aforementioned recommendations should not be considered exhaustive.

Mr. Eric Wang (Ecofibre, on behalf of U.S. Hemp Roundtable):

• He discussed how his company, Ecofibre, is a diversified industrial hemp company with vertically integrated operations across three divisions: hemp grain for food, the use of the hemp flower for CBD, and the use of the hemp stock for high performance industrial uses.
  • He indicated that the company had been in operation in Australia since 1999 and in the U.S. since 2015 following the 2014 Farm Bill’s Hemp Pilot Program.
• He testified that his company had developed one of the largest and most diverse hemp genetics collections and stated that his company would provide these genetics to hemp growers and universities.
  • He projected that these genetics would support the production of 24,000 acres of industrial hemp for commercial and research purposes for the 2022 growing season and the upcoming 2023 growing season.
  • He indicated that this growing activity would take place across 19 states.
• He noted that while Ecofibre was a publicly traded company on the Australian Stock Exchange, he testified that most of the company’s operations and 90 percent of the company’s capital had been invested in the company’s Kentucky and North Carolina operations.
• He attributed his company’s significant U.S. investments to the “tremendous” potential of the U.S.’s industrial hemp market and the existence of strong bipartisan political support for developing a U.S. hemp industry.
  • He commented that this support was largely attributable to its potential to spur manufacturing and to provide net-zero carbon solutions.
• He remarked however that the hemp industry faced several challenges as it developed and matured.
• He discussed how thousands of U.S. growers had planted hemp following the 2018 Farm Bill and noted how farming for CBD had initially represented the majority of the U.S.’s hemp acreage.
• He mentioned how FDA officials had since stated that the sale of ingestible hemp-derived CBD products was unlawful and commented that these statements had harmed the U.S. hemp industry.
  • He stated that the federal government’s continued inaction on CBD policy issues had a chilling effect on CBD commerce and investment, which has in turn reduced opportunities for U.S. farmers and processors.
• He stated that regulatory uncertainty surrounding CBD had also adversely impacted U.S. consumers and highlighted how bad actors were selling products without appropriate safeguards and were making false claims to consumers.
• He further discussed how some struggling farmers and businesses had pivoted towards marketing intoxicating products, such as Delta-8 THC.
  • He commended the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for issuing warnings about the consumer health and safety risks of these products and highlighted how these risks were particularly high for minors.
• He remarked that a clear regulatory pathway for CBD would relieve the economic pressure that was pushing farmers and businesses towards more intoxicating products and help to ensure that products did not contain intoxicating hemp ingredients.
• He recounted how FDA Commissioner Robert Califf had recently expressed his disappointment with the FDA’s lack of action on CBD and had expressed interest in developing a regulatory strategy for CBD.
  • He noted however that FDA Commissioner Califf had also stated that the FDA’s authorities to address CBD were limited under current law.
• He requested that Congress provide the FDA with more authority to oversee and regulate the CBD space as part of the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.
  • He suggested that the bipartisan Hemp and Hemp-Derived CBD Consumer Protection and Market Stabilization Act of 2021’s language could serve as a model for this language.
• He also recommended that Congress consider provisions from the Hemp Advancement Act of 2022 for inclusion into the 2023 Farm Bill.
  • He indicated that this legislation would limit the hemp product pathway to only non-intoxicating compounds.

Commissioner Ryan F. Quarles (Kentucky Department of Agriculture):

• He discussed how Kentucky was one of the first states to revive its hemp industry after the 2014 Farm Bill had permitted state departments of agriculture to research hemp under Sec. 7606. 
• He asserted that Kentucky’s legislative and regulatory framework for hemp was widely recognized as one of the best frameworks for overseeing hemp.
  • He noted how Kentucky’s hemp licensing program and data collected through the University of Kentucky were frequently cited in the USDA’s January 2021 final rule on hemp production.
• He discussed how Kentucky had observed a “rapid” expansion in terms of its hemp acreage between 2015 and 2019 that was followed by an equally rapid decline in hemp acreage beginning in the 2020 growing season.
  • He largely attributed this decline to the fact that the increase in hemp production following the 2018 Farm Bill had far outpaced demand for the plant.
• He stated that Kentucky was still growing hemp (albeit with smaller acreage) and highlighted how some Kentucky hemp companies were experiencing success.
• He contended that the biggest challenge currently facing the U.S. hemp industry was the lack of regulatory direction from the FDA.
  • He commented that this lack of direction for products containing hemp-derived CBD was leading large retailers to not carry CBD products.
  • He indicated that this refusal to carry CBD products made business leaders reluctant to move forward with the development and manufacturing of these products.
• He remarked that the FDA needed to provide regulatory pathways for products containing CBD and called for swift action.
  • He stated that FDA action would enable more private sector investments into hemp products and predicted that such action would spur many well-known consumer brands to enter the hemp market.
• He criticized the FDA for its failure to issue proper guidance on hemp issues, despite the fact that hemp production has now been legal for nearly one decade.

Commissioner Kate Greenberg (Colorado Department of Agriculture):

• She stated that Colorado had worked to support the growth of the hemp industry over the last several years and noted how these efforts were exemplified through the Colorado Hemp Advancement & Management Plan (CHAMP) initiative.
  • She indicated that the CHAMP initiative is a collaborative effort involving over 200 stakeholders, stage agencies, local and tribal governments, and industry experts.
• She noted how the CHAMP report contains key deliverables for addressing the regulation of hemp across the entire supply chain.
  • She indicated that these deliverables pertained to research and development (R&D), manufacturing, banking, and insurance.
• She also mentioned how the CHAMP report had informed the formation of Colorado’s state hemp plan, which received the USDA’s approval and was implemented on January 1, 2022.
• She testified that while registered hemp acreage in Colorado had increased “sharply” following the 2018 Farm Bill, she noted that Colorado had subsequently experienced a dramatic decrease in hemp acreage since 2019.
• She attributed this decrease in hemp acreage to several factors, including overproduction and burdens imposed on hemp producers under the 2018 Farm Bill.
  • She elaborated that these burdens included higher testing and sampling fees, background checks, and duplicative U.S. Farm Service Agency (FSA) acreage reporting.
• She also mentioned how a recent survey had found that many hemp producers believed that increasing the hemp THC limit to 1 percent would encourage further hemp production.
• She then discussed how Colorado had taken on additional responsibilities since implementing their state hemp plan.
  • She testified that Colorado had expanded its testing from 30 percent to 100 percent of all hemp lots, approved 18 performance-based sampling plans, and trained and certified 16 authorized samplers throughout the state.
• She noted how 100 percent of Colorado’s regulatory program costs were paid for by producers through registration fees.
• She remarked that Colorado was facing similar challenges as other states that had turned their programs back to USDA in terms of making their state hemp program financially sustainable.
  • She testified that USDA staff had been “very responsive” to her state’s concerns and mentioned that Colorado had requested greater flexibility through the USDA’s rulemaking process.
• She stated that Congress could provide support to federal agencies to allow for greater flexibility and improve state-run hemp programs.
• She made five recommendations for achieving these objectives.
  • She recommended that Congress remove the DEA requirements for testing laboratories and contended that the DEA’s certification process took too long.
  • She recommended that Congress permit the use of certified seed as an alternative to the strict testing requirement.
  • She recommended that Congress remove background check requirements for hemp producers.
  • She recommended that Congress establish a federal grant program to support state hemp programs.
  • She recommended that Congress support federal agencies (particularly the FDA) in accelerating the regulatory process to allow for the use of hemp as feed.

Opening Statements (cont.): 

Full Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA):

• He expressed his disappointment that representatives from the USDA and the FDA were not testifying at the hearing and remarked that the USDA and the FDA had an “integral” role in regulating and overseeing hemp.
  • He expressed his hope that the Committee would hold a future hearing featuring the perspectives of the USDA and FDA on hemp policy issues.
• He then discussed how there had been significant excitement regarding the prospects for hemp immediately following the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill.
• He noted however that there had occurred a significant decrease in the number of hemp acres planted since 2019.
  • He also mentioned how there had occurred continued investment in using hemp fiber for a variety of industrial products during this period.
• He expressed interest in obtaining the perspectives of stakeholders during the hearing and stated that these perspectives would help to inform the Committee’s work on the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.

Congressional Question Period:

Subcommittee Chairman Stacey Plaskett (D-VI):

• Chairman Plaskett asked Commissioner Quarles to discuss some of the complexities that had arisen following the enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill. She asked Commissioner Quarles to indicate whether the USDA’s 2021 final rule on hemp had helped to clarify things for states, tribes, and other hemp producers.
  • Commissioner Quarles remarked that industry hemp’s biggest issue prior to 2018 was hemp’s classification as a controlled substance under the Controlled Substance Act. He stated that other issues have since emerged since the 2018 Farm Bill had removed hemp from the list of controlled substances. He indicated that these challenges included access to banking services for hemp businesses, interstate travel and transportation of hemp materials, law enforcement confusion as to how to approach hemp, and the lack of standardized testing for hemp products. He remarked that the USDA deserved accolades for their progress in developing a regulatory and oversight framework for hemp. He asserted however that Congress still needed to address several hemp policy issues in the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill. He stated that there remained significant confusion surrounding FSA hemp reporting guidelines. He expressed receptiveness towards Commissioner Greenberg’s proposal for the creation of a federal grant program that would provide grants to states that set up their own hemp programs. He commented that some states might not want to operate their own hemp programs as a result of the current regulatory uncertainty. He lastly called for the FDA to provide states with clear guidance on hemp issues. He specifically requested FDA guidance on floral products derived from hemp.
• Chairman Plaskett asked Commissioner Greenberg to discuss how the U.S. markets for hemp had developed and fluctuated since the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill. She also asked Commissioner Greenberg to address what would be needed to provide market certainty and stability for hemp farmers, producers, and consumers.
  • Commissioner Greenberg remarked that market diversification would be important for a thriving hemp economy. She noted how the market opportunities for hemp producers following the 2018 Farm Bill were very narrow and mainly surrounded CBD. She stated however that the market opportunities for hemp producers had grown in the ensuing years and indicated that these market opportunities now included fiber, food, fuel, and other products. She remarked that supply chain gaps and limits served as barriers to hemp processing and manufacturing and asserted that policymakers must work to address these supply chain issues.
• Chairman Plaskett then asked the witnesses to provide recommendations for increasing the participation of socially disadvantaged farmers in hemp production. She commented that incumbent farmers appeared to be dominating the hemp space at the present time.
  • Dr. Phipps noted that her university is an 1890 Land-Grant Institution and therefore focuses on supporting disadvantaged farmers and communities. She commended the USDA’s programs aimed at helping tribal communities, HBCUs and minority farmers. She stated that the SUSHI project and other similar projects played a key role in engaging with MSIs. She expressed support for these types of transdisciplinary and multi-institutional research projects.

Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Baird (R-IN):

• Ranking Member Baird asked Dr. Phipps to discuss the importance of competitive agriculture research grants and to identify lessons learned from the grant application process. He further asked Dr. Phipps to address how multi-institution projects could be beneficial.
  • Dr. Phipps noted that while one of her research projects was currently in the first of its five years, she stated that the benefits of the project’s integrated, transdisciplinary, and multi-institutional nature were already visible. She remarked that transdisciplinary approaches were needed for complex issues. She asserted that these research teams often required economists, social scientists, tribal representatives, nutritionists, crop experts, and other types of experts in order to make the projects successful and to inform the decisions of policymakers and consumers. She applauded the performance of the USDA’s Sustainable Agricultural Systems (SAS) program in addressing complex issues and recommended that policymakers model future agriculture research projects off of the SAS program.
• Ranking Member Baird then noted how Ecofibre had been in the Australian market since 1999 and had only entered the U.S. market in recent years. He asked Mr. Wang to discuss the differences between the Australian hemp market and the U.S. hemp market. He also asked Mr. Wang to provide any lessons learned from the Australian hemp market that could be incorporated into the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.
  • Mr. Wang noted how Ecofibre had started primarily as a genetics company in 1999 and stated that Ecofibre’s early work had sought to set up a genetic pool for future hemp and cannabis research. He testified that Ecofibre currently has 2,100 accessions of hemp genetics. He stated that Ecofibre’s initial 15 years in business had focused on growing hemp in the latitudes of Australia and indicated that these latitudes match those of the U.S. He remarked that Ecofibre then brought their work to the U.S. due to the U.S.’s market size and opportunity. He asserted that the 2018 Farm Bill provided the U.S. with a better regulatory structure for hemp as compared to Australia. He noted how Australia had three different regulators for hemp based on whether the hemp was being used for food purposes, medicinal purposes, or fiber purposes. He testified that Ecofibre faced challenges in terms of navigating the three different regulators for hemp. He expressed support for the U.S.’s “crop-down” approach to hemp regulation. He remarked that the regulation of hemp in food and industrial uses was well-established and called for additional regulatory guidance for the CBD segment of the hemp market. He also stated that the U.S. needed to bolster its supply chains in order to provide market certainty for manufacturers and consumers interested in hemp products.

Rep. Shontel Brown (D-OH):

• Rep. Brown noted how the 2018 Farm Bill had legalized the production of hemp. She highlighted how the USDA required that any laboratory testing hemp for compliance with the 2018 Farm Bill’s THC limits be registered with the DEA. She asked Mr. Grignon to discuss how the dearth of DEA-approved laboratories in certain regions was impacting hemp producers within those regions.
  • Mr. Grignon discussed how THC testing was often confined to certain regions due to a lack of DEA-registered laboratories. He commented that this situation resulted in long testing wait times for producers in states without DEA-registered laboratories. He stated that this lack of testing capacity served as a key impediment to the U.S. hemp industry’s growth.
• Rep. Brown then asked Dr. Phipps to discuss some of the complexities that arose following the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill regarding the regulation of hemp and hemp-derived products.
  • Dr. Phipps remarked that it had been difficult to get the FDA to approve the use of hemp in animal feeds. She described this approval process as costly and unwieldy. She suggested that Congress could boost funding for the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) to address these approval challenges. She also recommended that the U.S. study how the European Union (EU) had approached the use of hemp in animal feeds and noted how the EU had already made several approvals in this area. She then stated that the other witnesses would be better suited to discuss the other complexities that arose following the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill regarding the regulation of hemp and hemp-derived products.
• Rep. Brown then asked Dr. Phipps to provide recommendations for the USDA and the FDA could increase the consumer awareness around the nutrient benefits of hemp products.
  • Dr. Phipps noted how the USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) contained a section that was focused on outreach and education. She recommended that Congress continue to fund land grant universities whose missions contained an education and outreach component. She also highlighted how the University of Kentucky and the University of Delaware were currently conducting research on consumer knowledge of hemp relative to consumer knowledge of marijuana. She then expressed support for increased funding for research related to the nutrient values of hemp grain for human consumption and how hemp grain could benefit the food supply related to animal production. She recommended that policymakers focus on curriculum building at the K-12 level as a means of promoting education about the nutrient benefits of hemp products. She commented that such educational efforts would help to combat chronic disease.
• Rep. Brown expressed interest in working to strengthen the U.S.’s hemp production capabilities as part of the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.

Full Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA):

• Ranking Member Thompson mentioned his work to champion conservative solutions to the problem of climate change and commented that agriculture producers would play a key role in addressing the problem. He expressed interest in Ecofibre’s work to make hemp a natural climate solution and specifically highlighted Ecofibre’s work on Hemp Black. He asked Mr. Wang to further discuss Ecofibre’s work in this area.
  • Mr. Wang noted how the hemp plant was carbon negative. He stated that the remainder of the hemp plant tended to either go unused or be used for lower quality and lower grade purposes (such as animal bedding). He indicated that this remainder of the hemp plant contained a large amount of carbon. He testified that Ecofibre had developed a carbonization process to convert this remainder into a hemp-based carbon black-equivalent substance. He stated that this substance is 100 percent bio-based and was a highly carbon negative input. He noted that this substance could be used in bioplastics, rubber, textile colors, inks, and coating. He testified that Ecofibre was using this substance to make plastic products 25 percent biobased. He stated that Ecofibre was working to replace an existing petroleum-based input (i.e., carbon black) with a hemp-based equivalent input and commented that this replacement had a significant net effect on carbon emissions. He further highlighted how there existed a variety of uses for hemp and stated that Ecofibre had simply identified one new use. He contended that these new hemp inputs needed to serve as one-for-one supply chain replacements of inputs. He elaborated that it would be impractical to expect manufacturers to invest large amounts of capital in new inputs for the sole purpose of using hemp. He also asserted that new hemp inputs needed to have the same technical specifications and costs as the existing inputs. He expressed hope that Ecofibre could reduce the costs of its Hemp Black alternative as it scaled up its manufacturing capabilities.
• Ranking Member Thompson provided the other witnesses with an opportunity to address how hemp could be used to combat climate change.
  • Commissioner Greenberg remarked that Colorado was focused on the climate mitigation properties of hemp and stated that hemp would play a large role in the state’s efforts to combat climate change. She also discussed how Colorado was working to diversify its hemp supply chains, invest in hemp manufacturing and processing capabilities, and support farmers in pursuing “climate-smart” agriculture production.
  • Mr. Wang also mentioned how Ecofibre was working on mine site remediation. He called hemp a “phenomenal” remediator of soil and noted how hemp could restore the nutrients of the soil affected by mining.
• Ranking Member Thompson noted how his Congressional District had more abandoned mine sites than all of the other Congressional Districts combined. He expressed interest in how Ecofibre was using hemp to address abandoned mine sites.

Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME):

• Rep. Pingree remarked that the existing DEA laboratory testing requirements for hemp and the ten-year ban on people with drug-related felony convictions from becoming hemp producers were causing hemp to be treated the same as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act. She called this treatment of hemp “ridiculous.” She also mentioned how Maine hemp producers had reported challenges in obtaining fingerprints that would be acceptable by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for criminal history reports. She added that Maine’s rural nature made it difficult for many producers to travel to the limited number of locations in the state that provided fingerprinting services. She noted that she had introduced the Hemp Advancement Act of 2022, which would eliminate the aforementioned ten-year ban and the DEA’s laboratory testing requirements for hemp. She asked Commissioner Greenberg to indicate whether Colorado hemp growers faced similar challenges. She also asked Commissioner Greenberg to address how the elimination of the aforementioned ten-year ban and the DEA’s laboratory testing requirements could help hemp growers.
  • Commissioner Greenberg remarked that existing DEA laboratory testing requirements served as a barrier to Colorado’s hemp production. She testified that Colorado possessed a state-of-the-art brand new laboratory and mentioned how Colorado had experience successfully regulating both hemp and marijuana. She noted however that this new laboratory had been awaiting DEA certification for three years. She asserted that the DEA’s laboratory testing requirements were excessive and not necessary for creating a safe and reliable regulatory framework for hemp. She then contended that the ten-year ban on people with drug-related felony convictions from becoming hemp producers was improper given how hemp was a legal crop. She also mentioned how Colorado was working to promote access to hemp production opportunities.
• Rep. Pingree then highlighted how the Hemp Advancement Act of 2022 sought to raise the allowable THC threshold for hemp and the in-process hemp extract to make the rules more workable for hemp growers and processors. She also stated that the legislation sought to ensure that the final hemp products sold to consumers were not intoxicating. She asked Commissioner Quarles and Commissioner Greenberg to discuss how hemp producers had previously been forced to destroy their entire crops as a result of the current THC threshold. She also asked Commissioner Quarles and Commissioner Greenberg to address how raising the THC threshold could help hemp growers and processors
  • Commissioner Quarles discussed how hot hemp (which was hemp with THC levels above current law) had been a persistent problem for Kentucky, despite improvements in genetics. He noted that Kentucky had responded to this problem through prohibiting varieties of hemp that were known to test hot. He stated that Kentucky sought to prevent hot hemp from materializing on the front end. He also mentioned how Kentucky provided retesting opportunities for hemp crops that exceeded the 0.3 percent THC threshold. He indicated that Kentucky had successfully advocated for the USDA to permit growers to have a second testing opportunity for their hemp crops that exceeded the 0.3 percent THC threshold. He then noted how the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) had passed a policy advocating for increasing the THC threshold for hemp from 0.3 percent to 1 percent. He testified that conversations with law enforcement agencies, hemp producers, and laboratories had informed this policy. He commented that such an increase in the THC threshold would provide more flexibility in researching hemp genetics.
• Rep. Pingree indicated that her question period time had expired.

Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-CA):

• Rep. Carbajal acknowledged that while the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture lacked jurisdiction over the scheduling of cannabis under the Controlled Substances Act, he expressed his hope that the Committee would eventually be able to recognize cannabis as an agricultural product. He highlighted how cannabis was already legal in several states (including California). He then discussed how the U.S.’s legalization of hemp had enabled the hemp industry to grow and noted how hemp was a very versatile crop with many uses. He expressed interest in using the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill to bolster hemp research and production. He then noted how Colorado had experienced a “significant” decrease in registered hemp acres between 2020 and 2022. He mentioned how this decrease had been attributed to several factors, including supply chain disruptions, a hemp surplus, and the lack of infrastructure for food and fiber production from hemp. He asked Commissioner Greenberg to indicate whether other crops had been grown on this acreage that had previously been used for hemp. He also asked Commissioner Greenberg to identify the factor that was most responsible for Colorado’s decline in registered hemp acreage. He further asked Commissioner Greenberg to address how Congress could help to alleviate this decline.
  • Commissioner Greenberg remarked that Colorado’s 2019 hemp production varied across the state. She noted how some existing farmers had produced hemp in addition to other types of crops and how there had been first-time farmers that focused exclusively on hemp production. She commented that these different approaches to hemp production have influenced how these farmers had subsequently used their land. She noted that much of the land that was used for hemp production in 2019 was now being used to produce other types of crops. She remarked that the primary factor that was responsible for the sudden decline in Colorado’s registered hemp acreage was the 2019 spike in interest for hemp production. She stated that the Colorado hemp industry was now in a more stable growth position than in 2019. She commented that the maturation of markets, the development of more stable regulatory environments, the buildup of supply chains, and creation of environmental opportunities for hemp producers would support more sustainable hemp production growth.
• Rep. Carbajal then noted how Dr. Phipps had asserted that hemp growers lacked incentives to partner with domestic buyers and processors. He asked Dr. Phipps to identify which incentives would be helpful for encouraging hemp growers to partner with domestic buyers and processors. He also asked Dr. Phipps to address whether and how Congress could support the development of such incentives.
  • Dr. Phipps highlighted how there had occurred a spike in hemp production immediately following the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill and noted how many of these hemp growers had expected to partner with processors to distribute their products. She suggested that federal funding for hemp processors should include funds for recruiting and paying hemp growers. She commented that this approach would support the development of a hemp production network.

Rep. Al Lawson (D-FL):

• Rep. Lawson noted how prospective hemp producers faced challenges when seeking to enter the industrial hemp market. He noted that these barriers included registration and testing fees and background check requirements. He asked Dr. Phipps to discuss how the U.S. Cooperative Extension Service (CES) provided technical and financial assistance to historically underserved agriculture producers, including small businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.
  • Dr. Phipps noted how 1890 Land-Grant Institutions were specifically founded to support equitable finance and education opportunities for producers, farmers, and consumers from underprivileged backgrounds. She mentioned her involvement in a project that was designed to support healthy communities through building micro-incubator farms in low access areas, business training for small local farmers, and educating consumers about the benefits associated with purchasing products from small local farmers. She remarked that the U.S. needed to provide opportunities for farmers, producers, and processors from historically disadvantaged communities to access funding so that the communities could build critical infrastructure. She commented that the U.S. had historically not provided equitable access to competitive grants. She noted how both universities serving disadvantaged communities and producers from disadvantaged communities often did not have professional grant writers, which made it more difficult for them to obtain grants. She stated that these opportunities could be supported through the establishment of dedicated funding streams for historically disadvantaged communities or the provision of technical assistance to these communities.
• Rep. Lawson then asked Dr. Phipps to address whether women had faced barriers in terms of entering the hemp industry. He expressed particular interest regarding the experience of prospective women hemp producers in Florida.
  • Dr. Phipps stated that she did not know about the experience of women seeking to enter the hemp industry in Florida. She remarked however that the fields of agriculture and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) have historically been dominated by White men. She acknowledged that only eight out of the 32 SUSHI project leads were women. She further noted how women from racial and ethnic minorities tended to receive less research funding and were underrepresented within the farming sector. She stated that a review of funding processes and recruitment strategies would help to increase the representation of women of color in agriculture and STEM fields.

Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Baird (R-IN):

• Ranking Member Baird called on the FDA to establish a regulatory framework for hemp-derived CBD. He stated that the Committee ought to consider this issue as it worked to draft the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.

Subcommittee Chairman Stacey Plaskett (D-VI):

• Chairman Plaskett expressed agreement with Ranking Member Jim Baird (R-IN) that the Committee ought to consider advocating for the FDA’s establishment of a regulatory framework for hemp-derived CBD as it drafted the upcoming 2023 Farm Bill.