BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 566|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 566
Author: Leno (D), et al.
Amended: 5/24/13
Vote: 21
SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE : 5-0, 4/2/13
AYES: Galgiani, Cannella, Berryhill, Lieu, Wolk
SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 4/30/13
AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Block, De León, Knight, Liu, Steinberg
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/23/13
AYES: De León, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
SUBJECT : Industrial hemp
SOURCE : Hemp Industries Association
Vote Hemp
DIGEST : This bill permits hemp to be grown in the state, upon
federal approval, by defining industrial hemp to be excluded
from the definition of marijuana. Additionally, this bill
provides for cultivation practices, laboratory testing,
reporting requirements, and regulation.
ANALYSIS :
Existing federal and state law:
1. Places controlled substances in five schedules, ranked by
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
2
medical benefit and potential for abuse. Schedule I
controlled substances are deemed to have no medical benefits
and a high potential for abuse.
2. Includes marijuana in Schedule I.
Existing federal law separately lists tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)
as a Schedule I substance. Federal court decisions have held
that THC in Schedule I applies only to synthetic THC, because
"if naturally-occurring THC were covered under THC, there would
be no need to have a separate category for marijuana, ? which
contains naturally-occurring THC." (Hemp Industries v. Drug
Enforcement Administration (2004) 357 F.3d 1012, 1015, quoting a
related case)
Existing state law:
1. Defines "marijuana" as all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa
L., whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin
extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound,
manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the
plant, its seeds or resin. It does not include the mature
stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or
cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound,
manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the
mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber,
oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant.
2. Provides that cultivation of marijuana is a felony,
punishable by a prison term of 16 months, two years or three
years and a fine of up to $10,000.
This bill:
1. Defines "industrial hemp" as follows:
A. An agricultural field crop limited to the
non-psychoactive varieties of the of the plant Cannabis
sativa L., and the seeds produced therefrom;
B. Industrial hemp shall have no more than 3/10 of 1%
(0.3%) THC contained in the dry flowering tops; and
C. Industrial hemp shall be cultivated and processed
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
3
exclusively for the purpose of producing the mature stalks
of the plant and by-products of the stalk and seed,
including oil or cake made from seeds, and other
preparations.
2. Redefines "marijuana" to exclude industrial hemp when
cultivated or processed for defined purposes.
3. Defines "industrial hemp" to mean a nonpsychoactive type of
the plant Cannabis sativa L. that contains no more than 0.3%
THC contained in the flowering tops, and cultivated and
processed exclusively for the purpose of producing the mature
stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or
cake made from the seeds of the plant, or for other defined
purposes.
4. States findings, declarations, and intent of the Legislature
in regards to industrial hemp.
5. Creates a new division for hemp under the Food and
Agriculture Code.
6. Provides for cultivation requirements, minimum acreage,
signage, and various plant cultivation prohibitions to allow
visual differentiation between hemp and marijuana fields,
with exceptions.
7. Includes industrial hemp, hemp seed, oil, yarn, and woven
fabrics as products imported under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States of the U.S. International Trade
Commission.
8. Provides that a person who grows industrial hemp and is not
an established agricultural research institution or seed
breeder required to abide by specified sampling and
laboratory testing procedures.
9. Requires that laboratory test reports be issued by a
laboratory registered with the federal Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) and such reports state the percentage
content of THC, the date and location of samples taken, the
Global Positioning System coordinates, and total crop
acreage.
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
4
10.Requires that laboratory test reports be marked with the
appropriate test result, as specified. A "passed" result is
a THC level at or below 0.3% content in a random sample of
the industrial hemp grown.
11.Requires the testing laboratory to provide not less than 10
original signed copies of the report for the farmer.
Requires the farmer to retain at least one copy of this
report for a minimum of two years and to make copies
available to law enforcement and to each person purchasing,
transporting, or otherwise obtaining hemp plant materials.
12.Provides that industrial hemp be destroyed if laboratory
testing indicates THC content greater than 0.3%.
13.Provides that a person who grows hemp with THC content
greater than 0.3% not be prosecuted for cultivation or
possession of marijuana.
14.Defines "established agricultural research institution" and
"seed breeder" as follows:
A. An "established agricultural research institution" is a
public or private institution or organization that
maintains land for agricultural research, including
colleges, universities, agricultural research centers, and
conservation research centers.
B. A "seed breeder" is an individual or public or private
institution or organization that develops viable
industrial hemp seed for sale or research.
15.Prohibits the possession of hemp resin, flowering tops, or
leaves, except as necessary to conduct laboratory testing.
16.Requires the following reports by January 1, 2019, or within
five years after hemp agriculture is approved under federal
law:
A. The Attorney General shall report to the Legislature
any incident where marijuana is falsely claimed to be
hemp, or where hemp cultivation is used to disguise
marijuana cultivation.
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
5
B. The Hemp Industries Association shall also provide a
report on the economic impacts of industrial hemp
cultivation.
17.Is not operative unless authorized under federal law.
Background
Congressional Research Service (CRS) report . In 2012, CRS
issued a report titled "Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity."
This report describes the current state of hemp in the U.S.,
including production and use, legal status, and legislative
activity. CRS reports that "although marijuana is also a
variety of cannabis, it is genetically distinct from industrial
hemp and is further distinguished by its use and chemical
makeup." The report continues that "nine states have legalized
the cultivation and research of industrial hemp, including
Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota,
Oregon, Vermont, and West Virginia. However, because federal
law still prohibits cultivation, a grower still must get
permission from the DEA in order to grow hemp or face the
possibility of federal charges or property confiscation, despite
having a state-issued permit."
Prior Legislation
AB 388 (Strom-Martin, 2002) would have requested the University
of California to assess the economic opportunities of specialty
or alternative fiber crops, including industrial hemp, and
report to the Legislature by January 1, 2004. The bill was
vetoed by Governor Davis.
AB 448 (Strom-Martin, 2001) would have authorized the Secretary
of Department of Food and Agriculture (DFA) to issue licenses to
cultivate hemp for commercial purposes. The bill failed passage
in the Assembly Agriculture Committee,
AB 1147 (Leno, 2006) would have permitted the cultivation of
industrial hemp in California. The bill was vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger. In his veto message, the Governor stated that
hemp is still considered a cannabis plant regardless of its THC
content and, therefore, illegal under federal law.
AB 684 (Leno, 2007) would have permitted the cultivation of
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
6
industrial hemp in California under a pilot program in four
counties. The bill was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. In
his veto message, the Governor stated law enforcement has
expressed concerns that implementation of this measure could
place a drain on their resources and cause significant problems
with drug enforcement activities.
SB 676 (Leno, 2011) would have permitted the cultivation of
industrial hemp in California under a pilot program in four
counties. The bill was vetoed by Governor Brown. In his veto
message, the Governor stated that hemp is still a federally
regulated controlled substance, although it is absurd that hemp
is being imported into the state, but our farmers cannot grow
it.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, DFA estimates
likely minor costs. The Seed Services Program is funded on a
fee-for-service basis; thus, hemp seeds would be treated as
another kind of seed that has to be labeled in accordance to the
seed law. The planting of marijuana amongst hemp could lead to
more allegations of bad seed and hence seed complaints that are
costly for DFA to investigate and administer. However, this
likelihood is unknown.
Additionally, the Department of Justice would incur a one-time,
potentially significant General Fund cost to meet this bill's
reporting requirements.
SUPPORT : (per Senate Agriculture Committee analysis of 4/1/13
- unable to reverify at time of writing)
Hemp Industries Association (co-source)
Vote Hemp (co-source)
American Civil Liberties Union of California
Business Alliance for Commerce in Hemp
California Certified Organic Farmers
California State Grange
California State Sheriffs' Association
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Colorganics, Inc.
Dash Hemp
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
7
Datsusara
Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps
Drug Policy Alliance
Ecological Farming Association
Hempsteads
Hempy's, Inc.
Humboldt Traders
Instituto Laboral de la Raza
Jungmaven Ltd.
Kings County Sheriff David S. Robinson
Knoll Farms
Lafe's Natural BodyCare
Nutiva, Inc.
Planning and Conservation League
Santa Barbara Hemp Company
The Living Temple
United Food and Commercial Workers 8 - Golden State
United Food and Commercial Workers, Western States Council
US Hemp Oil Inc.
OPPOSITION : (per Senate Agriculture Committee analysis of
4/1/13 - unable to reverify at time of writing)
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, this bill "is
necessary to prepare California farmers to grow industrial hemp
immediately following federal approval. The bill will allow
California farmers to take advantage of this economic
opportunity and more quickly meet the demands of California
businesses and manufacturers for a local source for raw hemp
material."
According to the author and sponsors, "the annual United States
retail market for hemp products has grown steadily since 1990 to
approximately $500 million in 2012, increasing at a rate of
about $26 million annually."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the opponents, "this
bill will undermine law enforcement efforts to curtail marijuana
cultivation and will result in significantly increased costs in
connection with the prosecution of marijuana trafficking cases."
Additionally, the opponents state, "the impact of legalizing
CONTINUED
SB 566
Page
8
hemp will be that marijuana cultivators will be able to
camouflage their illegal grows with a perimeter of same sex hemp
plants. Effectively, this will require law enforcement to test
plants for THC content before taking any action."
According to the opponents, "since the state crime labs
currently are not equipped to test for THC content, they will
either have to incur the costs of gearing up for this function,
or local agencies will have to incur the additional costs of
finding a private lab to conduct testing? The increased costs
for marijuana trafficking prosecutions are incalculable."
Additionally, the opponents state, "Dr. Vantreese-Askren, who is
recognized as the nation's leading authority on the economics of
hemp cultivation, is dubious about the viability of a hemp
cultivation industry in the United States because American hemp
farmers would be unable to compete with the heavily subsidized
Chinese and European cultivation industries."
JL:k 5/25/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED