Agency official urges moving hemp-processing oversight to Cannabis Control Board amid federal-state tensions

Steve Collier of the Agency of Agriculture told the legislative committee that the state should consolidate oversight of hemp processors under the state Cannabis Control Board to resolve conflicts between federal and state law and give processors a clear regulatory home.

Collier outlined the legal history that complicates state regulation of cannabis and hemp: the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 and the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 made marijuana a highly controlled drug at the federal level, while later federal farm bills (2014 and 2018) created a separate legal path for hemp. "Hemp is the same plant as cannabis and marijuana," Collier said, "but it's differentiated by whether a plant exceeds the delta-9 THC threshold." He cited the 2014 Farm Bill that defined hemp as cannabis with 0.3% or less delta-9 THC on a dry-weight basis and said the 2018 Farm Bill tightened testing rules by requiring conversion of THCA to THC when measuring potency.

Why it matters: Collier said the tighter federal standards, combined with the way federal funding and drug-free workplace rules operate, make it risky for the Agency of Agriculture to continue regulating hemp processing. "If we have a schedule-one substance in our workplace," he said, "it violates the federal drug-free workplace act and all of the money we get could be taken from us." To avoid that risk and to give processors a consistent regulator, Collier said the pending proposal in the other legislative chamber would formally transfer authority over all cannabis (including hemp processing) to the Cannabis Control Board (CCB).

Committee members pressed Collier on practical effects. Representative Nelson asked whether the move would make permitting more onerous; Collier replied that growers already must register with USDA and that the proposed language would require USDA registration plus notice to the CCB, not a new production quota: "You just have to register. There's no limit on what you could grow with the USDA," he said. Representative Brook asked about terminology and Collier recommended distinguishing "hemp" for low-THC cultivars and "cannabis" or "high-THC cannabis" for psychoactive varieties to keep regulatory language clear.

Collier described market realities in Vermont: processors that succeeded typically sell CBD and related isolates in national markets, while industrial uses (fiber, concrete) have not proved broadly competitive. He also flagged enforcement complications from novel cannabinoids such as delta-8 and delta-10 that can be psychoactive but evade simple delta-9 tests; Vermont rules already address some of those products, he said. Collier told members the USDA program now handles grower registration (free to register) and that in 2022 many staff and functions moved to the CCB so those regulators could administer retail and processing.

Collier also noted a recent federal measure cited in the discussion that would impose a very small cap on hemp product potency (the transcript cited "0.4 milligrams"), a change committee members said could make many current retail products impractical if it goes into effect.

What comes next: The Cannabis Control Board is scheduled to present to the committee the following morning so members can hear the board's perspective on administration and enforcement; committee members said they expect bill language on the transfer when it is ready. The committee took a brief recess to move on to other agenda items.