Anytime your product is over 0.3% THC you enter the grey zone.
I used isomerizing hemp derived thc isolate as a demonstration of how the legal argument about shipping hemp derived cannabinoids was not a strong one.
2 Likes
Ok so literally the second I put my ethanol extract into a rotovap I become a potential criminal?
Your understanding of the law is flawed.
2 Likes
Basically the law is vague, and is very very unlikely anyone will bust down your door and test your disty for heat. But try getting pulled over in Idaho with 1000 liters of said disty and then you can eat all the prayers from people on the internet telling you how the farm bill made it legal
You’re pole vaulting to conclusions here.
2 Likes
If you aren’t allowed to have a product that tests over 0.3% and you have a product that they test and it’s over 0.3% you’re gonna explain your case to a judge not to the police that are raiding your lab
At least until someone gets charged with something then beats it in court and it becomes law at what ever level they were charged at. That’s how it works in Canada anyways
3 Likes
Ya okay I’m like what is dude not getting. He’s just arguing the technicalities of how dumb the hemp rules are written. So every lab in every state in the country breaks the law every single day and ships illegal goods every single day and every single product essentially besides a CBD isolate is illegal. And even then the mother liquid is left and they are still therefore… you got it! Breaking the law lol
2 Likes
Law in general is a giant technicality. And yes, I’m well aware of the absurdity of the situation. My point was whether you want to be the one arguing about how the farm bill means you can now ship THC products across state lines after getting arrested or if you’d prefer to have someone else do the driving
1 Like
My interpretation of the farm bill federally was that material and or product that is sold or transported in interstate commerce must meet the 0.3% threshold. Again, that would be interstate.
Vermont’s own rules can be interpreted in different ways IMO. But I believe in VT you can transfer hot material to another processor in-state if it is part of your THC disposal plan approved by the Dept AG. Here’s a few of those regulations from VT
6.1.A Processor is responsible for demonstrating compliance with the acceptable potency level for hemp products and hemp-infused products offered for sale or transfer.
6.6.A Processor that extracts THC or THC-A from a hemp crop must submit for approval by the Agency a disposal plan that ensures the THC and THC-A is disposed of in a manner that renders the THC and THC-A unusable and that accounts by process lot number all THC or THC-A removed.
6.7.A Processor may transfer or sell hemp concentrate for the purpose of reformulation into hemp products or hemp-infused products only to: (a) the Grower of the hemp crop if they are a Processor, or (b) to another Processor.
In the last few years I’ve never had the state or law enforcement give me any trouble locally. Even if they did, I feel my attorney could make a good argument with that language. Interstate, I mean you could try it and if it gets seized roll the dice.
What we lack, IMO, is precedent in court, which at the federal level tends to set the bar. Unless someone can point me to a court case i haven’t seen.
2 Likes
So 6.7 statute right there would be what we would be adhering to. Unless it specifically says you cannot abide by that statute when it comes to interstate transfer from processor to processor ?
Well those statutes are for processors working in the state of Vermont. I have no idea if VT would approve of a plan that involved transfer out of state but they very well might. My point was that at the state level in VT your pretty kosher if transfer to another lab is part of your disposal plan and was approved by the Dept AG.
Massachusetts however is more tricky just south of VT. Their hemp processing program dictates that MA labs can only process MA hemp, I would have to check again to verify that includes extract. I believe it’s still legal in MA to buy hemp derived CBD for formulation, but I’m not 100% sure without checking again.
Where does the total thc vs actual delta 9 thc get factored in to this? My state of Virginia wants the total thc (ie post decarb) to be the determining factor. Some states AG departments are fine with looking at only the thcd9 in the oil or plant. Has anyone been bothered due to higher thca content?
They were talking about decarbing extract and biomass before state testing, not sure about your genetic verification COA.
I would be surprised if they used it, but FID will decarb thca to some extent. I would hope a state lab uses MS
Gotcha but I have been having a lab produce stable CBDa shatter for me and they use a cold extraction method Coa is .118% thcd9 and 3.99%Thca
I think how far that would fly would very much be on a case by case basis.
I would not expect thca to remain a technicality for very long even if it was, the DEA regulates other active drug precursors , I wouldn’t expect thca to be any different.
Wasn’t there a guy in the UK busted selling a lot of thca isolate because he claimed only D9 was illegal?
As far as I can find Thca isn’t scheduled by the USA but I know there is the Federal Analogue Act which Thca could fall under thc in that category.
Will see what the fda comes up with at the end of the month!
I didn’t hear about the UK man being charged.
We are well represented here in Wisconsin-
everyone knows that the dairy industry is in trouble and Wisconsin farmers livelihoods are seeing a big rebound - people are rebuilding their farms and pumping money into the local economy- politicians like that.
we work directly with the state reps and senators who pushed the hemp pilot program through the legislature and are in regular contact
I’m sure if I had some interaction with a police officer that ended with me having to explain the law I could just call the capitol and have an educational session so that the police can be briefed and trained on proper protocol.
The idea that anyone is going to be busting down my door and running in guns drawn and arresting everyone who works in my facility assumes a very paranoid mindset.
1 Like
You are not understanding what I am saying, and I’m not really going to bother retyping it, but I assure you that you are misinterpreting what I am saying.
I’ve figured out part of what you are confused about, it is the conflation of risk and legality. I’m not making a claim on risk, only legality. Risk is much harder to make generalizions, and it’s obvious that it’s not risky to make and use hot stuff in your own facility. That doesn’t mean it’s legal
Your still stuck on the fact that every CBD lab in every state in the entire country are all breaking the law everyday. It’s just silly
1 Like
I’m not stuck on it… Honestly it’s a bit annoying that you keep repeatedly telling me I mean something despite me telling you that I am not trying to say that.
Personally I would be cautious sending distillate across state lines but I don’t look over my shoulder as I run wiped film. Also I am saying the federal law is vague about whether it is legal to make >0.3% disty at all. You seem to think this means I want everyone to stop making it. Lol I dunno why you can’t just hear what I am trying to explain my points are