Don’t Reinvent The Wheel: A Tour of ASTM Standards for Cannabis and Hemp – Part 2

By David Vaillencourt, Bethany Moore
No Comments

In our previous article, we delved into the foundational ASTM International standards that are shaping the cannabis and hemp industries. We explored the first true universal symbol for cannabis, water activity controls, and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) standards. As we continue this journey, we turn our attention to four additional ASTM International standards that are pivotal for ensuring public health and safety and streamlining operations for cannabis and hemp operators. These include standards on conducting a product recall, Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA), how to establish a Quality Management System (QMS), and management responsibilities in an effective cannabis business. In this article, we speak with experts who contributed a significant amount of time and knowledge in shaping these standards, including Trevor Morones of Control Point Consulting, Cary Black of CK Black Group, and Steven Cooper of Quality Initiatives LLC.

Recall/Removal Procedures: Ensuring Swift and Safe Actions

When seven people died from taking unknowingly contaminated TYLENOLⓇ in 1982, it was the swift actions of Johnson & Johnson in initiating a costly but prudent recall that salvaged their reputation. Since then, numerous companies in the food, beverage, and pharmaceutical industries have been subjected to recalls. The reality is, that even the most robust processes are susceptible to human error or unforeseen circumstances. And in that worst case scenario, having a tested recall plan in place is critical to be able to respond efficiently, minimize harm to consumers, and maintain brand trust. The ASTM standard for recall/removal procedures provides just that; a structured approach to swiftly and effectively remove potentially harmful products from the market. Imagine a cannabis producer discovers that a batch of edibles has pieces of metal shavings in it. With this standard implemented, this company would have the ability to immediately initiate a recall, contact the distributors and retailers that received the product to remove the product from shelves and notify consumers. Within hours, the potentially dangerous product is no longer available, and public safety is safeguarded. This swift action not only protects consumers but also helps maintain the company’s reputation for quality and safety.

Cary Black, ASTM Fellow, ASQ CQE, PCQI, and Principal Consultant for CK Black Group, Inc., and Technical Contact for the ASTM standard ‘D8220-20 Standard Guide for Conducting Recall/Removal Procedures for Products in the Cannabis Industry’ said, “Effective recall procedures provide the final fail-safe for consumer safety. As in the food industries, the supplement industries, the pharmaceutical industries, cannabis industry must hold the same capability to effectively, quickly, and efficiently recall products that have been determined to be a risk for consumers. For an efficient recall program, there is a vetted series of protocols that have been employed to quickly recall adulterated products. From forming the recall team and maintaining clear and accurate traceability records from your raw materials, your inventory, and shipping to your customers; all these elements come together to create a seamless series of steps to initiate an effective recall when needed.

For an effective recall program, not only should the proper elements be in place for a recall, additionally there should also be provisions for conducting mock recalls to allow the recall team to practice the efficacy of their record keeping and procedural implementation.

Any supplier of cannabis products for human or animal consumption is required by all authorities having jurisdiction to a program in place and the ability to quickly recall adulterated products.

CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action): Proactive Problem Solving

As we stated above, even the most robust processes are susceptible to human error or unforeseen circumstances. Wouldn’t it be nice if there was a way to prevent those mistakes from ever happening again? Enter Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA). A foundational tried and true component of every quality management system is that it is designed to identify the true root cause of a mistake, implement a corrective action, and verify the effectiveness of the corrective action to prevent the recurrence of such a mistake. Even better, CAPA is a tool to prevent the occurrence of problems before they occur in the first place. The ASTM CAPA standard guides operators in systematically addressing problems to avoid recurrence, leading to streamlined operations and enhancements to overall product quality and consistency. In the example above where the cannabis edibles producer has identified contaminated products and recalled the products from shelves, the next natural step would be to become proactive about ensuring that it does not occur again. That’s one of many examples where the CAPA standard steps in and provides a valuable solution.

Trevor Morones, Control Point founder and Chair of ASTM’s Cannabis Subcommittee on Personnel Training, Assessment, Credentialing (D37.06), who was involved in developing the ASTM CAPA standard D8299, said, “Implementing effective corrective action processes within an organization yields substantial benefits. Proactively preventing recurring incidents is key, but the commitment to continuous improvement is equally crucial. Open and effective communication with all involved parties is not just essential; it’s a way of showing that everyone’s input is valued and included in identifying and implementing the best solutions. Moreover, embracing ASTM standards can greatly enhance an organization’s competitive edge in the marketplace.

Kara Lavaux, CP-FS, CQA, Compliance Consultant for Allay Consulting, said, “To build on what Trevor said, a CAPA plan is a hard-working component of a quality management system. CAPA works for times when you need to react to an issue, and for times when you have the foresight to prevent a future issue. The key to an effective CAPA program is learning to shift the focus away from the symptom of the issue and instead focus attention and action on the root of the issue. It’s the root of the issue that needs a corrective action, which will result in both the correction of the symptoms and the prevention of the issue in the future. In the example above of distributed edibles with mold contamination, the issue (risk to the public) was “fixed” by completing a quick recall of the products. But this correction does not prevent the issue from occurring again in the future. If we do not put control measures in place to prevent the mold on the edibles, we could continue distributing moldy edibles and will continue conducting reactionary recalls to protect consumers. Opening a CAPA and doing a deep dive into what caused the mold will reveal the root issue that needs to have a corrective action. Is it a water activity issue with the recipe, or perhaps a handling issue during packaging, or perhaps a storage issue at the dispensary? The CAPA investigation will reveal the root cause. Fixing the root cause leads to continual improvement of the process and prevents the issue from recurring.”

Establishing a QMS for Consumer Products: Foundation of Quality

In the 1980s, manufacturers discovered the value of implementing a Quality Management System (QMS) to provide a high level of confidence both internally and to their customers that their products would deliver on the quality and consistency that they were expected to meet. Forty years later, being certified to having an effective quality management system is one of the most basic requirements of companies engaging in global trade. The ASTM standard for establishing a QMS for consumer products lays the groundwork for comprehensive quality management in the cannabis and hemp industries. For example, when a company is launching a new line of products, a QMS provides the structure to develop and document the process for everything from ingredient sourcing to final product testing. This ensures that when this production line is scaled and commercialized, the process will be validated to provide the confidence needed that consumers will receive a safe and consistent product time and time again. Additionally, companies with a QMS will more easily be able to adapt to regulatory changes and stay in line with compliance requirements.

Cary Black, author of the ASTM standard, ‘D8222-21a Standard Guide for Establishing a Quality Management System (QMS) for Consumer Use of Cannabis/Hemp Products’ said, “Having a functional QMS is typically the first set of requirements for governing the manufacture and distribution of products. For products consumed by humans or animals a functional QMS sets the base for practices aligned with GMP. For most authorities having jurisdiction, relative to products that are consumed by humans or animals, a QMS supporting GMP compliance is required.

A functional QMS additionally provides the platform for a system that not only drives regulatory compliance, but also adjusts to and supports continuous improvement efforts, provides systems for manufacturing and distribution, and can foster increased productivity, improve efficiencies, incorporate risk management approaches, and ultimately ensure the safety of the products to its consumers.

The more participants within the Cannabis industry embrace the value of implementing a functional QMS, the more sustainable their manufacturing and product lines will become and the closer they will be to a risk management approach that aligns with most GMP requirements for cannabis products consumed by humans or animals.

Management Responsibilities in Managing a QMS: Leadership and Accountability

You don’t have to be a retired Navy SEAL to understand the significant influence that leadership has when it comes to building a successful organization. Effective quality management requires strong leadership and clear responsibilities. The ASTM standard for management responsibilities in managing a QMS (D8398) outlines the roles and duties of management in developing, implementing, and maintaining an effective quality system. The symbiotic relationship between leadership and employees is crucial to fostering a culture of excellence. Ensuring that management is allocating the appropriate resources, providing adequate training, and regularly reviewing the system is paramount for employees to feel supported and confident in their understanding of how their roles are part of the bigger picture of maintaining high standards. And when employees have clear roles and responsibilities with the requisite support, businesses succeed. Research from Gallup has shown that companies with engaged employees benefit from 40% less quality defects and are more than 20% profitable compared to peer organizations with low employee engagement.

Steven Cooper, President of Quality Initiatives LLC, and author of this standard, emphasized the importance of leadership demonstrating support of quality and safety and how it can impact the entire company in the long term. “When I was involved in writing this standard, my main focus was to target the CEO or other top management of a company, or someone who is looking to start a company. My standard is intended for these types of people to help them simply understand some of the basic requirements to do things right and to ensure they get off on the right foot toward product quality. Most of the other standards written for GMP are rather long documents intended for a quality professional, and my document is specifically targeting someone who needs to capture the basic top-line requirements without spending a lot of time trying to understand an extensive detailed GMP requirements document. Ultimately, it’s easy for management to give lip service in saying “quality is important” but how do they get serious? How does an employee do their job to feed the need to satisfy quality requirements? What role does the employee have in the quality management system? And that’s where management needs to ensure a good understanding of the employees, which is achieved by training and follow through, but also by setting an example. And by that, I mean that the first time there is a quality problem, what does management do? Do they ignore it? Do they say it costs too much to fix? Are they serious? And that message really has to be very carefully delivered ot the employees so they are not only aware of the need for quality, but they have an appreciation of the importance. That can only be delivered by management walking the walk, not just talking the talk. 

As an example, a company can say they care about quality. They can hang posters and have meetings, but in one incident I observed, it wasn’t until there was a safety incident where someone could have been seriously injured or worse, and a mistake was made, at that moment, the reaction by management was critical. Did they just have a meeting to talk about it? Nope. The VP of Operations shut down the facility for three days, which is difficult to do when the company is demanding product, and customer orders are waiting to be filled, money on the line, etc, but when that decision was made, it sent a very serious message to all of the employees in the factory about the importance of quality. After that, the respect and appreciation for safety rose to a much higher level, and probably remained there for many years, all because of that one incident and the way management reacted. They walked the walk, not just talked the talk. They didn’t just take shortcuts to get the product out the door. 

Shaping The Industry

As the cannabis and hemp industries continue to evolve, the marketplace is going to get more competitive and only those with a high bar of quality, and the data to prove it, wil succeed.These four ASTM standards—recall/removal procedures, CAPA, establishing a QMS, and management responsibilities in QMS—are invaluable resources for operators to implement to not only maintain regulatory compliance, but ensure a future of success. By adhering to these standards, operators not only safeguard public health but also streamline their processes and build a stronger, more trustworthy industry.

In our next article, we will explore additional ASTM standards that are paving the way for innovation and excellence in the cannabis and hemp sectors. Stay tuned as we continue to highlight the standards that are shaping the future of this dynamic industry.

Call to Action: If you are a professional in the cannabis and hemp industries, consider joining ASTM and contributing to the development of these crucial standards. Together, we can build a safer and more efficient industry.

For more information on ASTM standards and how they can benefit your operations, visit https://www.astm.org/get-involved/membership.html.

IICPS universal symbol

Don’t Reinvent the Wheel: A Tour of ASTM Standards for Cannabis – Part 1

By Bethany Moore, David Vaillencourt
No Comments
IICPS universal symbol

In the realm of consumer safety, minimum standards form a critical safety net that allows businesses and regulators alike with necessary guidelines. From our food and medicines, railroad tracks to bicycle helmets, crayons to cribs, standards are everywhere. Knowing where the lanes are and how to move inside of them provides the structure needed to guide manufacturers forward. And the cannabis and hemp industry is no exception. Why would it be?

In this series of articles, we will explore specific ASTM International standards that have already been developed and published by its Committee on Cannabis (commonly referred to by its Committee designation number – D37). With a frustrating lack of federal clarity, states are increasingly adopting these standards directly into their rules — and for good reason! These standards have gone through an extensive and rigorous process of achieving consensus, adhering to the principles set out by the World Trade Organization to reduce technical barriers to trade. These principles cover openness, balance, and transparency, and are one of many reasons why ASTM standards are confidently adopted into regulations by the US Federal Government. It is no wonder state regulators are increasingly leaning into those standards with confidence when creating rules and regulations for operators in the cannabis industry.

There are numerous benefits to standards adoption, including taking the guesswork out of the “how,” and streamlining operations, particularly when companies wish to scale up and expand. To provide color and context to the fuzzy world of standards, we will include insights from ASTM committee members who were involved in the hands-on process of standards development, including Kim Stuck of Allay Consulting, Dr. David Nathan of D4DPR (Doctors For Drug Policy Reform), and Dr. John DeVries.

“ASTM has been around for over a century, and it is common practice for governments to adopt the standards that have been written by their committees. It takes so much time and effort to put together standards to create safe and consistent products that it just makes sense for governments to adopt already written standards from a trusted source such as ASTM rather than spending the time and money writing a set of their own that will most likely mirror the ASTM standards. The cannabis standards that we have been developing since 2017 have also been written by experts in the industry so that no corner of the industry will be left unregulated,” said Kim Stuck of Allay Consulting, a strategic partner of The GMP Collective, and a participating member of the ASTM D37 Cannabis Committee.

“The process that ASTM uses has been proven to create the most well-rounded and consistent standards, and I am proud to be a part of the process,” Stuck continued. “ASTM International plays a pivotal role in the cannabis industry by providing comprehensive, science-based standards that guide the production, testing, and distribution of cannabis products. The development and implementation of these standards ensure consistent quality, safety, and efficacy across the industry, fostering trust among consumers, regulators, and industry stakeholders.”

HACCP Systems

The same program that was developed by the US Army, NASA, and Pillsbury to keep astronauts from getting sick in outer space is arguably one of the best standards for any cannabis operator to implement in their own operation. The Subcommittee on Quality Management Systems (D37.02) realized and did just that, developing the HACCP System standard, which provides general guidance for implementation in order to prevent, control, or minimize hazards (biological, chemical, or physical) to an acceptable level. The standard can be accessed by anyone with an active ASTM membership, or purchased individually for just $63. As of publication, this standard has been adopted in 3 states, including Oklahoma where it is recommended, New Mexico where it is required for medical applications, and Colorado, which is required as of July 2024 for growers who want a microbial-reduced testing allowance.

“Regarding the specific HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points) standard I was involved in developing, its application in the cannabis industry establishes a proactive approach to identifying, evaluating, and controlling potential hazards throughout the production and distribution process. This standardization is vital for ensuring product safety, quality assurance, and compliance with regulatory requirements.

“HACCP helps the industry minimize risks and prevent contamination, leading to safer products for consumers. By implementing these standards, businesses can provide greater transparency and build consumer confidence in their products. This, in turn, supports the industry’s growth and fosters a safer marketplace while also mitigating risk and preventing costly recalls and fines.

“Regulators and lawmakers rely on such standards because they offer a structured and consistent framework for assessing safety and quality in the industry. Having robust, science-based standards like HACCP helps establish clear benchmarks for producers to meet, ensuring consumer safety and facilitating effective regulation and enforcement. By adhering to these standards, the cannabis industry can gain legitimacy and support from both regulators and consumers,” added Stuck.

Universal Symbol

The most symbolic standard published by the D37 Cannabis Committee is just that: a valuable consumer-facing symbol recommended for use on the packaging of any consumer product that may contain a level of intoxicating cannabinoids. The symbol can be stamped onto edibles like gummies and chocolate, and/or included on packaging. The standard solves an issue that came out of the patchwork regulatory systems from state to state, where each state, upon rolling out rules and regulations, essentially made it up as they went along, developing their own symbols due to not being able to point to a universal standard. This symbol now exists, paving the way for a streamlined process as new states legalize cannabis for medical or adult use.

Dr. David Nathan, Founder and Past President of D4DPR, was a key leader in the development of this standard which is already in adoption across multiple states. “The International Intoxicating Cannabinoid Product Symbol (IICPS) is a harmonized, universal cannabis product symbol that was developed and approved as consensus standard ASTM D8441 by ASTM International through a unanimous vote of over 200 professionals and experts from the public and private sectors. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) mandates federal use of consensus standards, so the IICPS is poised to become the national cannabis product symbol when cannabis is legalized at the federal level,” Dr. Nathan said. The standard can be accessed through ASTM membership or purchased for a fee of $55.

Since its introduction in 2022, the IICPS has already been incorporated into the universal symbol of four U.S. states: Montana, South Dakota, New Jersey, and Vermont, and has been proposed in recent rulemaking in the State of Arkansas. Several other states are currently considering its adoption,” Dr. Nathan explained.

IICPS universal symbol
Above: International Intoxicating Cannabinoid Product Symbol (IICPS)

In 2023, 22 organizations representing public health, social justice, patient, consumer, and industry advocacy groups signed an open letter to regulators in the United States and around the world supporting universal adoption of the IICPS. If all states where cannabis is legal were to adopt this new standard moving forward, the result would be a significant time and cost savings in the long-run for companies who wish to expand across state lines. The symbol is clear, recognizable, and adheres to international interpretations based on color, shape, and other symbology factors. These factors were evaluated by a robust consumer research study to verify the effectiveness and intent of the symbol which was discussed in a webinar available on demand here.

To understand the impacts of many of the current symbols used in different states, written testimony submitted to the New York Office of Cannabis Management titled “A Symbolic Failure of Cannabis Regulation,” provides a colorful example. In it, Dr. Nathan states the following:

“The OCM symbol requires four-color printing, which is expensive. In a regulatory space intended to right the wrongs of the failed War on Drugs, the OCM symbol creates a barrier to entrepreneurs from historically oppressed communities who lack the capital to invest in costly packaging.

“The OCM symbol also violates numerous consensus standards, which are technical specifications issued by standards organizations like NIST, ASTM, and ISO. They are developed in an open environment to ensure public safety and promote best practices through collaboration by expert volunteers in the public and private sectors. Standards organizations have flourished since the 19th century, and their standards apply to everything from airplanes to zippers.”

Water Activity Controls

Dr. Jonathan DeVries, who provides food science services in regulatory and litigation matters, was the technical contact involved in developing the first two ASTM cannabis standards — developed to control water activity in cannabis flower that directly impacts both safety and quality of the product.

Dr. DeVries explained: “The first two methods adopted by ASTM committee D37 on Cannabis were ASTM D8196 Standard Practice for Determination of Water Activity (aw) in Cannabis Flower and ASTM D8197 Standard Specification for Maintaining Acceptable Water Activity (aw) Range (0.55 to 0.65) for Dry Cannabis Flower Intended for Human/Animal Use. During the early life stages of ASTM D37, cannabis growers, processors, and users stressed the importance of controlling the water activity of cannabis flower for safety and quality. All involved were generally aware that if the water activity was too high, microorganism growth, particularly mold, would damage the flowers rendering them unsafe (to say nothing of unpalatable). Similarly, cannabis flower that had a water activity that was too low (i.e the cannabis was too dry) could lead to dissatisfaction by the ultimate consumer because of handling losses due to fragility, loss of terpenes due to volatiles losses due to high burn temperatures during smoking, and unduly harsh characteristics of the smoke.” Both of those standards can be accessed through ASTM membership or purchased for a fee.

“Controlling the water activity to this range also is very logical during analysis, regulation, and commerce. Cannabis, properly dried and cured, then controlled to water activity 0.55 to 0.65 will exhibit very little variation in weight due to moisture change (controlling to a water activity range is typically more effective than controlling moisture directly) or loss or key volatiles that are part of the cannabis experience.

“As the technical contact for ASTM D8196 and D8197, I was always impressed with the ASTM processes, and of course, I was also impressed by the eagerness and willingness of those involved in providing safe, high-quality cannabis to be engaged in the process and share their extensive knowledge and experience to produce the optimum standard to meet the need.”

A Collaborative Effort

With more than 50 standards produced and published by the D37 Committee on Cannabis at ASTM, and another 50 more currently in development, there’s great opportunity to take the guesswork out of everything from Quality Management Systems, to Devices & Appliances, to Personnel Training, Assessment & Credentialing, and everything in between.

Stay tuned for the evolution of this article series, where we will explore more of these standards in order to understand their impact on ensuring consumer safety and streamlining what has been a chaotic patchwork of imperfect regulations and practices across the industry. By embracing standardized protocols and best practices, stakeholders can enhance transparency, build trust with consumers, and foster a more robust and sustainable cannabis market. Through collaboration and adherence to these evolving standards, we can pave the way towards a safer and more accountable cannabis and cannabinoid industry for all.

GMPC at NoCo Hemp

Highlights from NoCo Hemp Conference Panels: How did we get here, and where are we going?

By Bethany Moore, David Vaillencourt
No Comments
GMPC at NoCo Hemp

At the 10th Annual NoCo Hemp Conference and Expo, held in beautiful Estes Park, Colorado this year, educational panels included a wide array of topics covering both the fiber and industrial potentials of hemp products as well as the plant’s supplemental and dietary applications. Our attention was focused on consuming the policy and regulatory discussions held throughout the day on Thursday, April 11. The panels brought together “prominent stakeholders and thought leaders to explore the ever-evolving regulatory framework, innovative research initiatives, and the imminent implications of the upcoming 2024 Farm Bill for the hemp industry.” The day of panels brought together economists, prominent lawyers, regulatory health experts, and more. The array of speakers could be perceived to have disparate interests whereas, throughout the day, each panel brought valuable perspective and insights with a common theme: the need for collaboration and minimum standards for market certainty.

GMPC at NoCo Hemp
GMPC with Gillian Schauer at the 10th Annual NoCo Hemp Conference and Expo.

Keynote Panel

Kicking off the event on the main stage was a keynote address by Beau Whitney of Whitney Economics, addressing the economic outlook of the industry. Some key takeaways from his remarks included observations on the difficulty of market strategies due to constantly changing rules, prompting investors to have a “wait and see” approach to the industry. Currently, pricing has stabilized for cannabinoid biomass, and there is an overall increase in production for hemp fiber and grain, though more acres of hemp growth are needed to keep up with demand. The U.S. cannabinoid market boasts more than $28 billion potential, with cannabis sitting at a similar dollar amount. The illicit market, however, is estimated to hold $79 billion of the market. Whitney also noted that companies that intend to pursue the global market should do so by preparing for GMP/GAP certification.

ASTM Standards

The next panel heeded the call for the need for the development of minimum standards for consumer safety, as emphasized in the previous panel. The panel featured various experts who are involved in ASTM, including The GMP Collective CEO and Founder David Vaillencourt, along with Darwin Millard of TSOC, Alex Escher of Hemp Hollow Consulting, and Hunter Buffington of Agriculture Policy Solutions. Escher noted that there is not a one-size-fits-all protocol for testing hemp, but that safety is paramount in all applications. He offered a specific example of health and safety issues related to toxic dust concentration and pointed to a national story where an employee suffered fatal health issues while working in a cultivation facility. Occupational safety and health issues apply to the hemp and cannabis industry just like any other industry, and in-house safety protocols need to be central to every operation. Vaillencourt emphasized the importance of collaboration in creating viable and relevant market solutions, allowing collaboration between various stakeholders including biologists, chemists, economists, lawmakers, regulators, and more. He also encouraged further participation in ASTM International, a global standards organization that develops and publishes voluntary consensus technical standards for a wide range of materials, products, systems, and services. One way for participants to get involved is to become a member of ASTM and join the D37 Committee on Cannabis, and attend the upcoming USP-ASTM Workshop on Cannabis Medicine Quality happening in June in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania during the June Committee Week. Buffington, also an ASTM member, noted that the D37 Committee is collaborating with other non-cannabis committees to leverage information and expertise from other industries. Truly, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Millard, who chairs multiple D37 subcommittees, says that the only way to commercialize the plant is through standards. Laws beget regulations, and this is where standards become the “meat on the bone.” A lack of industry-accepted standards will prevent market adoption, he warns. Each of these panelists have rolled up their sleeves at the table of standards development, and they all echoed the invitation for more industry operators and stakeholders to get involved in ASTM and join the collaborative effort.

Buffington noted that hemp currently boasts more than 27,000 uses, and Vaillencourt emphasized the trillion-dollar market potential of the plant. “How do we go from today at a billion-dollar economy to the future trillion-dollar economy? We do that through the development of standards,” says Vaillencourt. Given that Congress has already directed federal regulators through the National Technology and Transfer Advancement Act to defer to standards that represent a balance of interest and filter out bias through the rigorous consensus voting process, all stakeholders interested in seeing a viable marketplace with safe products must pull up their seats to the ASTM table and participate in the standards creation process.

ASTM Darwin Panel Noco Hemp
ASTM Panel with David Vaillencourt and Darwin Millard at the 10th Annual NoCo Hemp Conference and Expo.

3-Pillar Vision for the Future

After the lunch break, the second keynote speaker, Rod Kight of Kight Law, offered his vision for cannabis reform, including a 3-pillar approach to regulating hemp and cannabis, noting that “what’s good for hemp now is good for cannabis tomorrow.” The first pillar emphasizes strict control of access to minors, which includes age-gating and possible parental consent for minors. He also stated that this includes non-intoxicating products as we still don’t have the data to understand the effects on developing brains. The second pillar underscored the importance of Quality Control and noted that GMP standards are objective quality standards that prevent contaminants and protect consumer safety. The third pillar addresses proper labeling and marketing, which should be informative and standardized. He emphasized the importance of transparent disclosure to consumers based on objective national standards rather than state-specific standards and should include all other relevant quality standards. “All of this requires a federal-level solution,” Kight noted. 

Regulatory State of the Union

In the next panel session, attendees heard a presentation on the 2024 regulatory “State of the Union” for the hemp plant. Panelists included Michelle Bodian of Vicente LLP, Jonathan Miller of U.S. Hemp Roundtable, Beau Whitney of Whitney Economics, and moderator Joy Beckerman of Hemp Ace International. The panel opened up with an icebreaker, asking panelists what they would like to see more of in the hemp industry. Bodian’s response pointed to the need for more definitions of hemp, in all of its forms, including the plant and its derivatives. Whitney noted that the current state of hemp creates confusion for regulators and law enforcement, and the lack of federal guidance creates problematic patchwork issues, creating heavy costs associated with aligning to various state rules. This ripple effect of keeping up with these costs can mean businesses close, employees lose their jobs, and states lose out on tax revenues, further underscoring the need for Congress to enact a new framework.

Lawmakers and Regulators Perspective

As the afternoon progressed, the next panel took the stage to address a regulatory path forward. Speakers included Rod Kight of Kight Law, Gillian Schauer of CANNRA, Tami Wahl, and Tyler Klimas of Leaf Street Strategies. Schauer began by explaining that CANNRA is a non-partisan, non-advocacy group with a focus on education, and that members of the organization include specific states and government agencies with the goal of learning from each other. She also provided clarity on the role of regulators, which is to implement the regulations that were passed in the ballot measures and to protect consumer safety while stabilizing businesses and not letting “one bad actor tank an entire industry.” She notes that at times, many aspects of the laws can become too scientifically dense for lawmakers and regulators who lack a scientific background. While discussing how the cannabinoid market can come together or overlay with current regulations, she underscored the need for more data, as well as standardized manufacturing, processing, and testing. Kight offered praise to CANNRA for attending the event and being present to listen and learn from the industry itself. He noted the crossroads we have come to, where hemp and cannabis are being marketed through two separate paths that have almost become at war with each other. “Now is the time to move forward,” he urged. Wahl emphasized the importance of product standards and data and the need for real-time data to ensure consume safety. “It is up to the brand holder to ensure their product is safe,” she said. As the panel wrapped up, Schauer pleaded for industry stakeholders to interact with regulators productively, and emphasized the distinction between who passed the law versus who has been tasked to enforce it. She noted the discouraging reality of regulators being harassed and receiving death threats, which she herself has also sadly experienced. (The GMP Collective webinar held on April 24, 2024 on bridging the regulatory gaps and challenges can be attended live on Zoom or the recording can be accessed on our YouTube channel.)

Bethany Moore, David Vaillencourt, and Alena Rodriguez at NoCo Hemp
Bethany Moore, David Vaillencourt, and Alena Rodriguez at the 10th Annual NoCo Hemp Conference and Expo.

FDA Fireside Chat

In the final panel session of the day, attendees sat in on a fireside chat with Patrick Cournoyer, Senior Science Advisor at the FDA, and Garrett Graff, Managing Attorney at Moye White. The conversation began by clarifying the distinction between what was laid out in the language of the Farm Bill versus the authority the FDA holds. Cournoyer noted that the “Drug Preclusion Clause” creates one of several barriers that prevent cannabis and hemp from being included in food and dietary supplements, and underscored the importance of consumer safety in both the immediate, as well a need for high assurance that consumers will be safe consuming a substance over the long term. Cournoyer explained that the FDA CBD Policy Working group, established in 2019, which also opened a public docket for feedback and comment, found that CBD and CBD products should not be considered food or dietary supplements. Scientific studies found that high levels of CBD consumption can have negative interactions with certain drugs, interferes with the metabolization of caffeine, and can contribute to liver toxicity and reproductive issues. Based on these findings, safeguards should be put in place as we continue to seek a path forward. Cournoyer emphasized that the goal of the FDA is to be solutions oriented, provide technical assistance upon request, and that they want to hear from stakeholders as they continue to wade through these complex issues.

Overall, the day of panel discussions underscored the importance for industry stakeholders, consumers, and government entities to keep the lines of communication open and flowing as we continue to find the balance between the existing and future marketplace while ensuring consumer safety. Although cannabis and hemp have historically been seen as completely separate lanes, we now know that this is not the reality any longer. For example, how can non-cannabinoid areas of the industry like hempcrete production for building materials collaborate with hempseed producers of a nutritional product or livestock food? In what ways can we continue to truly “free the plant” in all of its 27,000 uses? As the complexities of both the cannabis and hemp industries begin to align and merge through clearer definitions of use and application, it becomes clear that we must all understand the various lanes we’re in and how to navigate the future together. The 10th Annual NoCo Hemp Conference offered a platform for these discussions to take place as this important and complex conversation continues to evolve. We look forward to seeing the results of these conversations go beyond the educational panel stage and into the day-to-day workings that will ensure our industry continues to not only survive, but thrive. 

The Guardians of Consumer Safety: The Role of GMPs in Cannabis and Hemp

By David Vaillencourt, Bethany Moore
No Comments

Over the past century, numerous pivotal concepts have emerged, shaping the course of society and enhancing our collective well-being. Among these, Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) stand out as a beacon of assurance for product safety and consumer protection. Prior to the establishment of GMPs, industries such as pharmaceuticals operated in a murky landscape where products were peddled from wheeled carts as “miracle elixirs,” often containing undisclosed and potentially harmful ingredients. Labeling requirements were lax, production methods were shrouded in mystery, side effects were unknown, and the true efficacy of these concoctions was questioned.

Here in the United States, because of a previous lack of GMPs, there have been several major incidents over the years which have had catastrophic consequences. Poor controls for safety in the production of food, pharmaceuticals, supplements, medical devices, and more resulted in thousands of deaths and/or other medical issues. In 1938, three decades after the Pure Drug Act, Congress passed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which formally established the FDAs authority to protect public health.

Take ‘snake oil’ for instance, a term evoking deceptive practices or fraudulent schemes. The original Chinese concoction was made using the oil from Chinese Water Snakes which helped relieve sore muscles and inflammation. When American salesmen got ahold of the recipe, they attempted to use rattlesnake oil, which does not have the same properties as the Chinese Water Snake. By the time the recipe was tested, it was shown to contain alcohol and opium, but no real snake oil. This illustrates the dangers of unregulated products and the importance of standards like GMPs in ensuring product integrity and consumer safety. Without proper oversight, consumers are vulnerable to misleading claims and potentially harmful substances, underscoring the necessity of stringent manufacturing practices in all industries, including cannabis.

In reviewing several examples in history where tragedies resulted, we can go back as far as 1906 when tainted and misbranded food and drugs led to widespread illness and death until basic standards were established for product safety and labeling. Speaking of the turn of the century, if you haven’t read “The Jungle” by Upton Sinclair, put it on your reading list. It is one of the most influential books in American history, as it details the unsanitary conditions of the meat industry before GMPs and is directly responsible for Congress passing some of the first food safety laws.

Safety standards
Chairlift safety standards in the 1960s.

Some of you may be old enough to remember back in 1982 when seven people died after ingesting cyanide-laced Tylenol capsules. This led to the introduction of new industry standards, including tamper-evident packaging and heightened safety measures for over-the-counter medications.

Even in modern times, recalls of contaminated meats and produce serve as stark reminders of the ongoing importance of stringent safety measures. These recalled food products not only pose serious health risks but also incur significant financial losses and damage to the brand reputation of the companies involved. To further underscore the importance of these safety measures, in 1994 Congress authorized the FDA to implement GMP guidelines for dietary supplements through DSHEA (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act). However, GMP guidance for dietary supplements was not released until 2007.

“There are a lot of examples where failure to implement GMPs creates safety problems.  Many food recalls and FDA warning letters report problems with pest control, worker sanitation, cleaning and sanitation, employee practices, and other GMPs,” says Steve Gendel, Ph.D., an expert on food safety and consultant at The GMP Collective. (Gendel also serves as the Technical Contact for the cannabis GMP standard that was recently balloted at ASTM.) “One example of the problems caused by inadequate GMPs is the recent announcement that Family Dollar Stores pleaded guilty to a federal felony and must pay a $41 million fine for failure to control rodents in a warehouse. This follows a massive recall of hundreds of products that passed through that warehouse.”

In addition to criminal liability and hefty fines, a brand that fails to maintain the standard levels of safety and sanitation is not posing risks to customers and employees alike; it can also suffer long-term damage to reputation in the public eye, creating a public relations nightmare. In a blog by Rootwurks in August 2023 titled “It’s All About The Consumer,” Dr. Kathy Knutson, another food safety expert and consultant at The GMP Collective, states, “There can be brand damage through consumer litigation if any harm is caused. There can be regulatory action including fines and recalls. In the food industry, the average cost of a recall is $10 million.” For cannabis products, the most common types of recalls involve contamination of products containing Aspergillus, Salmonella, mold, heavy metals, and certain pesticides.

GMP triangle
The GMP Triangle

The cannabis industry, once relegated to the shadows of illegality, is now emerging into a legitimate marketplace. However, as it gains momentum, it faces numerous challenges, including the imperative of ensuring product safety, consistency, and regulatory compliance. Adopting and adhering to GMPs will be essential for the industry to establish marketplace trust, safeguard consumer health, and thrive in a competitive landscape. “The California Cannabis Commission lists 13 recalls for cannabis products from January 2022 through February 2024. Of these, nine were related to problems that could have been controlled by GMPs and/or good cultivation practices,” added Gendel.

Today, while there is no national requirement for Good Manufacturing Practices in the cannabis industry, over a dozen states currently require some form of GMP for cannabis operators — and for good reason. When implemented effectively, GMPs are good for businesses and good for consumers. They reduce the risk of costly product failures and recalls. They provide employees with the tools and guidance needed to carry out their duties — safely and efficiently. Whether it is preventing mold and pests through effective sanitation programs or verifying that equipment purchased works as intended, day in and day out GMPs truly are simply Good Practices and the absolute bare minimum that any business owner and consumer alike should demand of their operation.

The potential risks to human health aren’t limited to cannabis products alone. Vaporizers and other related devices represent a crucial aspect of safety to consider. As the cannabis industry transitions from illegality to legitimacy, ensuring product safety, consistency, and regulatory compliance becomes paramount. GMP adoption is crucial for establishing marketplace trust, safeguarding consumer health, and thriving in a competitive landscape.

Whether it’s the spices and herbs in your kitchen, medicines in your medicine cabinet, or the food in your refrigerator, GMPs have been recognized as the global minimum best practices that have helped our planet feed, nourish, and protect the nearly 8 billion people on our planet. In conclusion, the importance of GMPs spans all industries, safeguarding consumers and businesses alike. The cannabis industry’s embrace of GMPs signals a commitment to excellence and underscores the vital role these practices play in fostering a safe and reputable marketplace now and in the future.

Soapbox

Congress Wants YOU To Make Safe Products.

By David Vaillencourt
No Comments

Recently, Congress requested detailed information regarding the regulation of CBD and other cannabinoids. This comes on the heels of frustration around federal inaction with regards to cannabinoid-containing products produced from Cannabis sativa L. plant extracts that can be classified as “hemp” products amidst the clear need for safety standards that goes above and beyond state minimum compliance requirements.

A Historical Deja Vu?

The author will be joined by his colleagues leading the Seed to Sale Safety Workshop on October 16 at the Cannabis Quality Conference. Click here to learn more. Product safety standards predate the birth of our nation (and many others). From the days of the first pharmacopeias which rival the oldest documented use of the cannabis plant, to modern regulations, the quest for safety has been a constant theme. But as the saying goes “Old habits die hard,” but so do safety issues. From peanuts to thalidomide and tobacco, we’ve seen this movie before – and it is time for a new ending.

A Universal Desire for Safety

Whether you are an investor, executive, technician or anywhere in between – nobody in the cannabis industry (and all its end uses, including industrial hemp) wants to knowingly produce unsafe products. The risks of ignoring safety are real and tangible. Whether it is 20+ years in jail for being an executive of a company that knowingly sold adulterated products and was linked to seven deaths or 10,000+ deformed children, many of whom died at birth because of a drug approved for morning sickness – there is no shortage of case studies we can learn from. Even cannabis has been known to cause injury and death in consumers – not because of the d9-THC, but the impurities. As the industry continues to innovate and develop new product form factors – whether it is new delivery methods of d9-THC in soluble beverage forms, or the rise of manufactured cannabinoids in unregulated marketplaces – it’s critical to understand the risks of your entire production process and to mitigate them. No cannabis company is immune from making costly and dangerous mistakes. It’s not just about compliance – it’s about public health and safety.

Safety Can Be a Sticky Subject

Safety is indeed a complex subject, especially when it comes to cannabis products. For instance, acceptable limits for microbial contaminants for the inflorescence of a Cannabis sativa L. plant are quite literally all over the map. What about the route of administration? Take an inhaled product (like a vape pen) vs. an ingested product (e.g. an edible). Many outdoorsy people like myself may enjoy the smell of cooking s’mores over a campfire, but the particles and VOCs can irritate our lungs, especially when exposed over long periods of time. We aren’t inhaling those s’mores – so the production of the marshmallow, chocolate and graham crackers come with different risks we need to evaluate. It’s not just about the product – it’s how it’s consumed.

Safety Standards the Fabric of Our Society

Standards are unsung heroes of our daily lives. Whether it’s to keep planes from falling out of the sky, cribs and dressers from crushing young children, preventing train derailments or ensuring the safety of our food and medical products – standards keep us protected – just like grandma’s quilt. The absence of standards can be expensive, and anyone familiar with the accusations of d9-THC lab-shopping and inflated label claims knows that the cannabis industry is the poster child for this.

Congress has long recognized the importance of standards in protecting everyday consumers, as demonstrated by numerous legislative acts. A few notable and relevant ones to cannabis are below:

  • 1848 Drug Importation Act: First major act that combated the importation of substandard – adulterated drugs imported from overseas into the nation which was having a major impact on soldiers of the Mexican-American War.  This Act included legal requirements for drugs to meet the US Pharmacopeia’s standards for strength, quality, and purity.
  • 1906 Food and Drugs Act: After an increase in adulterated and misbranded foods and drugs – made famous by Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, the relentless work of Dr. Harvey Wiley, a Chief Chemist with the then US Department of Agriculture and his “poison squad” – led to significant oversight of adulterated food and drugs including legal adherence to the US Pharmacopeia and paved the way for the current FDA.
  • 1938 Food Drug, Cosmetic Act: Shortcomings in the 1906 Food and Drugs Act were catalyzed by over 100 deaths after a wonder drug that was analogous to antifreeze led to an outcry that led to the passage of the FDC&A. From factory inspections, to strict marketing and label requirements, to legally enforceable food standards and tolerances for certain poisonous substances – the FDA was given substantial more oversight to protect the growing United States. It also expressly recognized USP quality standards for medicines with USP standards also binding for any dietary supplement manufacturer that labels their products as being compliant with USP specifications.
  • 1994 Dietary Supplement Health Education Act (DSHEA) defined and regulated dietary supplements which carved out significant exemptions for the dietary and herbal supplement industry from most FDA drug regulations. This act has been met with significant controversy as it greatly limited the FDA’s capacity to ban or restrict supplements until evidence of a major safety or adverse event is tied to the product of concern.
  • 1995 National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA) – A lesser known act that is focused on standards and technology that requires participation of federal agencies in voluntary consensus standards bodies. Extending beyond foods and medicines – this act covers a broad array of infrastructure and technology regulations that ensure the fabric of our society operates (largely) without issue.

Over 1,000 ASTM standards are incorporated by reference in the US Code of Federal Regulations across nearly 30 federal agencies (searchable here), a demonstration of the value and impact public voluntary standards have in our society.

At the FDA, ASTM standards are used every day to keep us safe. Whether it is to measure the absorbency of tampons (21 CFR 801.430), enforce safety specifications of synthetic and natural wax coatings that are used to coat much of our produce, gummies and more (21 CFR 178.3770), quantifying the impurities in our bottled water (21 CFR 165.110) and many more.They have long been recognized as the de facto minimum standards that balance the need to protect consumers without imposing undue burdens on innovation by industry.

The process of developing an ASTM standard, which was developed and used to keep our trains from derailing 125 years ago, is now the home of 510+ cannabis industry specific standards. Whether it’s acceptable water activity levels in cannabis flower, a truly universal symbol to alert consumers of intoxicating cannabinoids, medical cannabis flower specifications developed in close guidance of the US Pharmacopeia, or how to apply the principles of HACCP to cannabis products, a lot of the hard work has already been done for the industry. It’s simply a matter of knowing where to look and how to use them!

The path to safe and sustainable cannabis products is clear, and the tools are available. It’s time that we learn from the past, apply the standards of the present and mitigate the risks of the future. Now more than ever before, it’s easy to make safe cannabis products and a credible marketplace not just a goal, but a reality.

Cannabis Manufacturing Considerations: From Raw Materials to Finished Goods

By David Vaillencourt, Kathleen May
2 Comments

Facility layout and design are important components of overall operations, both in terms of maximizing the effectiveness and efficiency of the process(es) executed in a facility, and in meeting the needs of personnel. Prior to the purchase of an existing building or investing in new construction, the activities and processes that will be conducted in a facility must be mapped out and evaluated to determine the appropriate infrastructure and flow of processes and materials. In cannabis markets where vertical integration is the required business model, multiple product and process flows must be incorporated into the design and construction. Materials of construction and critical utilities are essential considerations if there is the desire to meet Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) compliance or to process in an ISO certified cleanroom. Regardless of what type of facility is needed or desired, applicable local, federal and international regulations and standards must be reviewed to ensure proper design, construction and operation, as well as to guarantee safety of employees.

Materials of Construction

The materials of construction for interior work surfaces, walls, floors and ceilings should be fabricated of non-porous, smooth and corrosive resistant surfaces that are easily cleanable to prevent harboring of microorganisms and damage from chemical residues. Flooring should also provide wear resistance, stain and chemical resistance for high traffic applications. ISO 22196:2011, Measurement Of Antibacterial Activity On Plastics And Other Non-Porous Surfaces22 provides a method for evaluating the antibacterial activity of antibacterial-treated plastics, and other non-porous, surfaces of products (including intermediate products). Interior and exterior (including the roof) materials of construction should meet the requirements of ASTM E108 -11, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Covering7, UL 790, Standard for Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings 8, the International Building Code (IBC) 9, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 11, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and other applicable building and safety standards, particularly when the use, storage, filling, and handling of hazardous materials occurs in the facility. 

Utilities

Critical and non-critical utilities need to be considered in the initial planning phase of a facility build out. Critical utilities are the utilities that when used have the potential to impact product quality. These utilities include water systems, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), compressed air and pure steam. Non-critical utilities may not present a direct risk to product quality, but are necessary to support the successful, compliant and safe operations of a facility. These utilities include electrical infrastructure, lighting, fire detection and suppression systems, gas detection and sewage.

  1. Water
Microbial monitoring methods can include frequent/consistent testing

Water quality, both chemical and microbial, is a fundamental and often overlooked critical parameter in the design phase of cannabis operations. Water is used to irrigate plants, for personnel handwashing, potentially as a component in compounding/formulation of finished goods and for cleaning activities. The United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter 1231, Water for Pharmaceutical Purposes 2, provides extensive guidance on the design, operation, and monitoring of water systems. Water quality should be tested and monitored to ensure compliance to microbiological and chemical specifications based on the chosen water type, the intended use of the water, and the environment in which the water is used. Microbial monitoring methods are described in USP Chapter 61, Testing: Microbial Enumeration Tests 3and Chapter 62, Testing: Tests for Specified Microorganisms 4, and chemical monitoring methods are described in USP Chapter 643, Total Organic Carbon 5, and Chapter 645, Water Conductivity 6.Overall water usage must be considered during the facility design phase. In addition to utilizing water for irrigation, cleaning, product processing, and personal hygiene, water is used for heating and cooling of the HVAC system, fogging in pest control procedures and in wastewater treatment procedures  A facility’s water system must be capable of managing the amount of water required for the entire operation. Water usage and drainage must meet environmental protection standards. State and local municipalities may have water usage limits, capture and reuse requirements and regulations regarding runoff and erosion control that must also be considered as part of the water system design.

  1. Lighting

Lighting considerations for a cultivation facility are a balance between energy efficiency and what is optimal for plant growth. The preferred lighting choice has typically been High Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting, which includes metal halide (MH) and high-pressure sodium (HPS) bulbs. However, as of late, light-emitting diodes (LED) systems are gaining popularity due to increased energy saving possibilities and innovative technologies. Adequate lighting is critical for ensuring employees can effectively and safely perform their job functions. Many tasks performed on the production floor or in the laboratory require great attention to detail. Therefore, proper lighting is a significant consideration when designing a facility.

  1. HVAC
urban-gro
Proper lighting is a significant consideration when designing a facility.

Environmental factors, such as temperature, relative humidity (RH), airflow and air quality play a significant role in maintaining and controlling cannabis operations. A facility’s HVAC system has a direct impact on cultivation and manufacturing environments, and HVAC performance may make or break the success of an operation. Sensible heat ratios (SHRs) may be impacted by lighting usage and RH levels may be impacted by the water usage/irrigation schedule in a cultivation facility. Dehumidification considerations as described in the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA) Committee Blog: An Introduction to HVACD for Indoor Plant Environments – Why We Should Include a “D” for Dehumidification 26 are critical to support plant growth and vitality, minimize microbial proliferation in the work environment and to sustain product shelf-life/stability. All of these factors must be evaluated when commissioning an HVAC system. HVAC systems with monitoring sensors (temperature, RH and pressure) should be considered. Proper placement of sensors allows for real-time monitoring and a proactive approach to addressing excursions that could negatively impact the work environment.

  1. Compressed Air

Compressed air is another, often overlooked, critical component in cannabis operations. Compressed air may be used for a number of applications, including blowing off and drying work surfaces and bottles/containers prior to filling operations, and providing air for pneumatically controlled valves and cylinders. Common contaminants in compressed air are nonviable particles, water, oil, and viable microorganisms. Contaminants should be controlled with the use appropriate in-line filtration. Compressed air application that could impact final product quality and safety requires routine monitoring and testing. ISO 8573:2010, Compressed Air Specifications 21, separates air quality levels into classes to help differentiate air requirements based on facility type.

  1. Electrical Infrastructure

Facilities should be designed to meet the electrical demands of equipment operation, lighting, and accurate functionality of HVAC systems. Processes and procedures should be designed according to the requirements outlined in the National Electrical Code (NEC) 12, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 13, National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) 14, International Building Code (IBC) 9, International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 15 and any other relevant standards dictated by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ).

  1. Fire Detection and Suppression

“Facilities should be designed so that they can be easily expanded or adjusted to meet changing production and market needs.”Proper fire detection and suppression systems should be installed and maintained per the guidelines of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 11, International Building Code (IBC) 9, International Fire Code (IFC) 10, and any other relevant standards dictated by the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). Facilities should provide standard symbols to communicate fire safety, emergency and associated hazards information as defined in NFPA 170, Standard for Fire Safety and Emergency Symbols 27.

  1. Gas detection

Processes that utilize flammable gasses and solvents should have a continuous gas detection system as required per the IBC, Chapter 39, Section 3905 9. The gas detection should not be greater than 25 percent of the lower explosive limit/lower flammability limit (LEL/LFL) of the materials. Gas detection systems should be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 864, Standard for Control Units and Accessories for Fire Alarm Systems 16 and/or UL 2017, Standard for General-Purpose Signaling Devices and Systems 17 and UL 2075, Standard for Gas and Vapor Detectors and Sensors 18.

Product and Process Flow

Product and process flow considerations include flow of materials as well as personnel. The classic product and process flow of a facility is unidirectional where raw materials enter on one end and finished goods exit at the other. This design minimizes the risk of commingling unapproved and approved raw materials, components and finished goods. Facility space utilization is optimized by providing a more streamlined, efficient and effective process from batch production to final product release with minimal risk of errors. Additionally, efficient flow reduces safety risks to employees and an overall financial risk to the organization as a result of costly injuries. A continuous flow of raw materials and components ensures that supplies are available when needed and they are assessable with no obstructions that could present a potential safety hazard to employees. Proper training and education of personnel on general safety principles, defined work practices, equipment and controls can help reduce workplace accidents involving the moving, handling, and storing of materials. 

Facilities Management

Facilities management includes the processes and procedures required for the overall maintenance and security of a cannabis operation. Facilities management considerations during the design phase include pest control, preventative maintenance of critical utilities, and security.

Damage from whiteflies, thrips and powdery mildew could be prevented with an appropriate PCP

A Pest Control Program (PCP) ensures that pest and vermin control is carried out to eliminate health risks from pests and vermin, and to maintain the standards of hygiene necessary for the operation. Shipping and receiving areas are common entryways for pests. The type of dock and dock lever used could be a welcome mat or a blockade for rodents, birds, insects, and other vermin. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) should define the procedure and responsibility for PCP planning, implementation and monitoring.

Routine preventative maintenance (PM) on critical utilities should be conducted to maintain optimal performance and prevent microbial and/or particulate ingress into the work environment. Scheduled PMs may include filter replacement, leak and velocity testing, cleaning and sanitization, adjustment of airflow, the inspection of the air intake, fans, bearings and belts and the calibration of monitoring sensors.

In most medical cannabis markets, an established Security Program is a requirement as part of the licensing process. ASTM International standards: D8205 Guide for Video Surveillance System 23, D8217 Guide for Access Control System[24], and D8218 Guide for Intrusion Detection System (IDS) 25 provide guidance on how to set up a suitable facility security system and program. Facilities should be equipped with security cameras. The number and location of the security cameras should be based on the size, design and layout of the facility. Additional cameras may be required for larger facilities to ensure all “blind spots” are addressed. The facility security system should be monitored by an alarm system with 24/7 tracking. Retention of surveillance data should be defined in an SOP per the AHJ. Motion detectors, if utilized, should be linked to the alarm system, automatic lighting, and automatic notification reporting. The roof area should be monitored by motion sensors to prevent cut-and-drop intrusion. Daily and annual checks should be conducted on the alarm system to ensure proper operation. Physical barriers such as fencing, locked gates, secure doors, window protection, automatic access systems should be used to prevent unauthorized access to the facility. Security barriers must comply with local security, fire safety and zoning regulations. High security locks should be installed on all doors and gates. Facility access should be controlled via Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) access cards, biometric entry systems, keys, locks or codes. All areas where cannabis raw material or cannabis-derived products are processed or stored should be controlled, locked and access restricted to authorized personnel. These areas should be properly designated “Restricted Area – Authorized Personnel Only”.

Future Expansion

The thought of expansion in the beginning stages of facility design is probably the last thing on the mind of the business owner(s) as they are trying to get the operation up and running, but it is likely the first thing on the mind of investors, if they happen to be involved in the business venture. Facilities should be designed so that they can be easily expanded or adjusted to meet changing production and market needs. Thought must be given to how critical systems and product and process flows may be impacted if future expansion is anticipated. The goal should be to minimize down time while maximizing space and production output. Therefore, proper up-front planning regarding future growth is imperative for the operation to be successful and maintain productivity while navigating through those changes.


References:

  1. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
  2. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter <1231>, Water for Pharmaceutical Purposes.
  3. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter <61>, Testing: Microbial Enumeration Tests.
  4. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter <62>, Testing: Tests for Specified Microorganisms.
  5. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter <643>, Total Organic Carbon.
  6. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter <645>, Water Conductivity.
  7. ASTM E108 -11, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings.
  8. UL 790, Standard for Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings.
  9. International Building Code (IBC).
  10. International Fire Code (IFC).
  11. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).
  12. National Electrical Code (NEC).
  13. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
  14. National Electrical Safety Code (NESC).
  15. International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).
  16. UL 864, Standard for Control Units and Accessories for Fire Alarm Systems.
  17. UL 2017, Standard for General-Purpose Signaling Devices and Systems.
  18. UL 2075, Standard for Gas and Vapor Detectors and Sensors.
  19. International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineers (ISPE) Good Practice Guide.
  20. International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineers (ISPE) Guide Water and Steam Systems.
  21. ISO 8573:2010, Compressed Air Specifications.
  22. ISO 22196:2011, Measurement Of Antibacterial Activity On Plastics And Other Non-Porous Surfaces.
  23. D8205 Guide for Video Surveillance System.
  24. D8217 Guide for Access Control Syst
  25. D8218 Guide for Intrusion Detection System (IDS).
  26. National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA): Committee Blog: An Introduction to HVACD for Indoor Plant Environments – Why We Should Include a “D” for Dehumidification.
  27. NFPA 170, Standard for Fire Safety and Emergency Symbols.
PlantTag

Quality Systems 101: CAPA Programs Drive Improvement & Prevent Costly Mistakes

By David Vaillencourt
No Comments
PlantTag

No business is perfect, especially when humans are part of the equation. But, how do you tackle fixing quality issues as they arise? The goal of this article is to shed some light on the value of a CAPA program and why many states are making them mandatory for cannabis businesses.

Let’s consider the following situations:

  • Analytical lab results for a production batch test above the limit for a banned pesticide or microbial contamination
  • You open a case of tincture bottles and some are broken
  • A customer returns a vape pen because it is leaking or ‘just doesn’t work’

Do you…

  • Document the issue?
  • Perform some sort of an investigation, asking questions of the people involved?
  • Ask for a retest? Then, if the test comes back positive, move on?

Let’s go through each one of these and understand why the suboptimal answer could be costing your business money:

You don’t document the issue

I hear excuses for skipping on documentation all the time.

  • “It’s not a big deal”
  • “It was a one off”
  • “The glasses probably broke in transit”
  • “They are cheap and easily replaceable”
  • “It’s not worth the time”
Tracking and documenting supplier shipments can help you identify supply chain issues.

In the situation of a couple of broken bottles in a shipment, what if it was the seventh time in the last two months? If you haven’t been documenting and tracking the issue, you have no way of knowing if it was a single occurrence. Remember when you were surprised that your filling team did not have enough bottles? Those broken bottles add up. Without documenting the incident, you will never know if it was truly a one-time mistake or the sign of a deeper issue. The reality is, it could be sloppy handling on the production line, issues with the shipper or even a sign of poor quality coming from the supplier.

Have you ever compared the number of fills vs the number of bottles ordered? How much money have you already lost due to those broken bottles adding up? Do you have the ability to answer this question?

You perform an investigation

Let’s say a customer returns a leaky vape pen. You perform an investigation by asking the production workers what they think went wrong. They say that it’s very difficult to get the seal for the cartridge into place. Their supervisor tells them to try harder, refunds the customer and moves on. But, why is it difficult to get the seal into place? Is it a design flaw? Should a special tool be used to assemble the cartridge properly? Without getting to the root cause of why the seals are leading to leaking cartridges, you are doomed to have repeat issues. Numerous studies have found that less than one in twenty dissatisfied customers will complain, and that approximately one in ten will simply leave for another brand or provider. How much is this unresolved issue truly costing your business?

Asking for a retest and if it passes, releasing the product and moving on.

labsphoto
In Colorado, 15% of the final tested cannabis flower products continue to fail.

Suppose a major producer of cereal received test results for its most popular cereal that were positive for levels of heavy metals that research has shown to be linked to cancer or developmental issues in children. Now, suppose the company stated that it was an isolated incident and a retest showed that the product met acceptable limits. Further investigation showed no paperwork, save for a couple of emails and a phone call between the lab and the producer. Would that give you peace of mind? This is known as “testing into compliance” and was the subject of a landmark lawsuit in 1993 that Barr Laboratories lost.

For many the answer would be a hard NO. But this happens every day. In Colorado, 12.5% of cannabis batches failed final product testing in 2018 and 2019. That’s one in eight batches! What happened to those products? Good question.

Enter: CAPA (Corrective Action and Preventive Action) programs! For people with a background in quality and GMPs (Good Manufacturing Practices), CAPA is a household name. And, it’s quickly becoming a requirement that cannabis regulatory bodies are looking at. Colorado was the first state to explicitly require CAPA programs for all license holders effective January of this year and has provided a free resource for them. But, for the large majority of people, including those in the cannabis industry, it’s just another acronym.

What does a CAPA program do?

The benefits are numerous but two major ones are:

An effective tool for investigating the true root cause

First of all, a CAPA program provides the framework for a tool for investigation – as Murphy’s Law posits – things go wrong all of the time. Whether you have a manual, labor-intensive process or a highly automated operation, the equipment is programmed, maintained and monitored by humans. The logical sequence of problem solving within a CAPA program allows you to thoroughly investigate and determine the root cause of the issue. With a complete understanding of root cause, you are then able to eliminate it and prevent future occurrences – not just in the one area investigated, but in all similar situations throughout the company.

System for continuous improvement

Gathering info from a customer complaint like batch or product IDs can be crucial in a CAPA system

Anyone who is in the market for a new car lately can appreciate the technological advances. In the 1980s, it was air bags and ABS brakes (those of you that drive in snowy climates and remember having to pump your brakes can appreciate technological advancements). Bluetooth technology for hands-free communication and radio control is another example of continuous improvement in cars.

This is one of the biggest predictors and differentiators between profitable and successful companies with satisfied clients and one that is barely scraping by. The cost of poor quality adds up!

Key inputs in a CAPA system 

If the output is an improved system and lower cost of quality, we need to make sure we’re considering the potential inputs. 

Information that feeds into your CAPA system:

Customer complaints

Every complaint must be recorded. Gather as much information as possible, but at a minimum: the product type/SKU, the customer name and date of purchase. If possible, the batch or product ID.

This is not necessarily to identify products for a recall, but to prevent…

Laboratory test results

This should not be restricted to final product testing, but include any in-process inspections. Say you have a product repeatedly failing final testing, what if it’s actually been consistently failing or very close to failing at the very first in-process inspection? It’s also important to work with your laboratory to understand their method validation process, including the accuracy, precision, robustness, etc.

Infrastructure & environmental controls/monitoring

Most people consider “environmental controls” to be things like temperature and humidity control. While that is true, it can also include pest and contamination control. Poorly designed infrastructure layouts are major contributors to product cross contamination as well.

Supplier information

Undetected supply chain issues (remember the broken bottles?) can add up fast! CAPAs for suppliers cannot just include supplier monitoring, but improvement in how you communicate your needs to your suppliers. It’s easy to overlook non-cannabis raw materials as sources of microbiological and chemical contamination. Conduct a risk assessment based on the type of contact with your product and the types of contamination possible and adjust your supplier qualification program accordingly.

Are you ready to recognize the benefits of a CAPA program?

One more major benefit of CAPA programs to mention before we go is … Preventive via predictive analytics.

In Colorado, 15% of the final tested cannabis flower products continue to fail, mostly due to mold and mildew. A quality system, with effective data capture that is funneled into a CAPA program can easily reduce this by 75%. For even a small business doing $2M per year in revenue, that equates to a revenue increase of nearly $200,000 with no additional expenses.

Whether you are operating in the State of Colorado or elsewhere, a CAPA and Recall program will provide immense value. In the best case, it will uncover systemic issues; worst case, it forces you to fix mild errors. What are you waiting for?

How Effective is Your Internal Auditing Program?

By David Vaillencourt
No Comments

The word “audit” evokes various emotions depending on your role in an organization and the context of the audit. While most are familiar with and loathe the IRS’s potential for a tax audit, the audits we are going to discuss today are (or should be) welcomed – proactive internal quality audits. A softer term that is also acceptable is “self-assessment.” These are independent assessments conducted to determine how effective an organization’s risk management, processes and general governance is. 

“How do you know where you’re going if you don’t know where you’ve been” – Maya Angelou

Internal quality audits are critical to ensuring the safety of products, workers, consumers and the environment. When planned and performed periodically, these audits provide credible, consistent and objective evidence to inform the organization of its risks, weaknesses and opportunities for improvement. Ask yourself the question: do your clients/vendors rely on you to produce reliable, consistent and safe products? Assuming the answer is yes, what confidence do you have, and where is the documented evidence to support it?

Compliance units within cannabis businesses are typically responsible for ensuring a business stays legally compliant with state and federal regulations. This level of minimum compliance is critical to prevent fines and ensure licenses are not revoked. However, compliance audits rarely include fundamental components that leave cannabis operators exposed to many unnecessary risks.

Internal quality audits are critical to ensuring the safety of products, workers, consumers and the environment.

As a producer of medical and adult-use products that are ingested, inhaled or consumed in other forms by our friends, family and neighbors, how can you be sure that these products are produced safely and consistently? Are you confident that the legal requirements mandated by your state cannabis control board are sufficient? Judging by the number of recalls and frustrations voiced by the industry regarding the myriad of regulations, I would bet the answer is no.

What questions do internal audits address? Some examples include:

  • Are you operating as management intends?
  • How effective is your system in meeting specified objectives? These objectives could include quality metrics of your products, on-time delivery rates and other client/customer satisfaction metrics.
  • Are there opportunities to improve?
  • Are you doing what you say you do (in your SOPs), and do you have the recorded evidence (records) to prove it?
  • Are you meeting the requirements of all applicable government regulations?

There are potential drawbacks to internal audits. For one, as impartiality is essential in internal audits, it may be challenging to identify an impartial internal auditor in a small operation. If your team always feels like it is in firefighting mode, it may feel like a luxury to take the time to pull members out of their day-to-day duties and disrupt ongoing operations for an audit. Some fear that as internal assessments are meant to be more thorough than external assessments, a laundry list of to-do items may be uncovered due to the audit. But, these self-assessments often uncover issues that have resulted in operational efficiencies in the first place. This resulting “laundry list” then affords a proactive tool to implement corrective actions in an organized manner that can prevent the recurrence of major issues, as well as prevent new issues. The benefits of internal audits outweigh the drawbacks; not to mention, conducting internal audits is required by nearly every globally-recognized program, both voluntary (e.g. ISO 9001 or ASTM Internationals’s Cannabis Certification Program) and government required programs such as 21 CFR 211 for Pharmaceuticals.

Internal Auditing is a catalyst for improving an organization’s effectiveness and efficiency by providing insight and recommendations based on analyses and assessments of data and business processes. Additional benefits of internal audits include giving your organization the means to:

  • Ensure compliance to the requirements of internal, international and industry standards as well as regulations and customer requirements
  • Determine the effectiveness of the implemented system in meeting specified objectives (quality, environmental, financial)
  • Explore opportunities for improvement
  • Meet statutory and regulatory requirements
  • Provide feedback to Top Management
  • Lower the cost of poor quality

Findings from all audits must be addressed. This is typically done in accordance with a CAPA (Corrective Action Preventive Action) program. To many unfamiliar with Quality Management Systems, this may be a new term. As of Jan 1, 2021, this is now a requirement for all cannabis licensed operators in Colorado. Many other states require a CAPA program or similar. Continuing education units (CEUs) are available through ASTM International’s CAPA training program, which was developed specifically for the cannabis industry.

Examples of common audit findings that require CAPAs include:

  • Calibration – Production and test equipment must be calibrated to ensure they provide accurate and repeatable results.
  • Document and record control – Documents and records need to be readily accessible but protected from unintended use.
  • Supplier management – Most standards have various requirements for supplier management that may include auditing suppliers, monitoring supplier performance, only using suppliers certified to specific standards, etc.
  • Internal audits – Believe it or not, since internal audits are required by many programs, it’s not uncommon to have a finding related to internal audits! Findings from an internal audit can include not conducting audits on schedule, not addressing audit findings or not having a properly qualified internal auditor. Are you looking for more guidance? Last year, members of ASTM International’s D37 Committee on Cannabis approved a Standard Guide for Cannabis and Hemp Operation Compliance Audits, ASTM D8308-21.

If you are still on the fence about the value of an internal audit, given the option of an inspector uncovering a non-conformance or your own team discovering and then correcting it, which would you prefer? With fines easily exceeding $100,000 by many cannabis enforcement units, the answer should be clear. Internal audits are a valuable tool that should not be feared.

Integrating a Culture of Quality Into the Cannabis Industry

By David Vaillencourt
1 Comment

The culture of the cannabis industry is filled with passion that many envy, and for valid reasons. The roots of the cannabis plant go back thousands of years. As of this writing, there are no documented human deaths that were caused by a phytocannabinoid overdose. However, it is not all rainbows and unicorns.

Before breaking ground, fundraising, proper facility design, competitive application and permitting requirements are just the start. Once operating, businesses struggle to stay current with regulations that continue to evolve. Cannabis cultivators struggle to scale while mitigating pest infestations, which is a part of life in the conventional agricultural industry. A lack of consistent products frustrates consumers, while regulators and policy makers continue to struggle on the best way to regulate a commodity that has seemingly endless demand. The reality is dizzying!

However, amidst all of the challenges and opportunities, a continually overlooked tool stands out: a Quality Management System (QMS). Merriam-Webster defines a system as “an organized set of doctrines, ideas, or principles usually intended to explain the arrangement or working of a systematic whole.”

A QMS documents processes, procedures and responsibilities that ultimately direct an organization’s activities to meet customer and regulatory requirements as well as continually improve its effectiveness and efficiency. In other words – it steers innovation through the collection of data while ensuring products are safe for the consumer. For further reading, the American Society for Quality (ASQ), now over 70 years old, is an excellent resource and provider of resources and formal training programs that are recognized and revered around the world.

Step 1: Define your stakeholder requirements

This all starts with knowing your stakeholder (e.g., customer, regulatory body) requirements. For simplicity’s sake, let’s start with your customer; at a fundamental level, they expect safe, consistent and reliable products that impart a certain experience.

How does that translate into specifications? Let’s look at them one at a time.

What does “safe” mean? For an edible, safe means the product is free of physical, chemical and microbial hazards. Knowing what potential impurities could be in your product requires understanding your raw materials (inputs) and the manufacturing process. To take a deeper dive, some of the aspects of safety and quality, product specifications and testing considerations are discussed in this recent Cannabis Industry Journal article by Dr. Roggen and Mr. Skrinskas here.

An example of a compliant label in Oregon

What does “consistent” mean? This builds off and complements the safety profile. It could mean a consistent fill level, an acceptable range of cannabinoid concentration, and so on. For example, in the US Pharmacopeia’s peer-reviewed article about quality attributes of cannabis inflorescence (commonly known as flower or bud), they recommend 20% as the acceptable variance in cannabinoid content. For a product labeled as having 25% THC, the product will actually test to between 20% and 30%. This may be surprising, and discomforting for some, but the reality is that products on the market consistently fail to meet label claims.

What does “reliable” mean? That could mean that you always have inventory of certain products on the shelves at your dispensary. Defining “always” as a SMART goal – perhaps it means that you will have your top 3 products in stock at least 90% of the time. Customers need to feel like they can rely on your business to provide them with the products they want. Take the time to capture the data on what your customers want and work to satisfy their needs and you’ll watch your business really accelerate.

Step 2: Build your processes to meet these expectations

This is where your written standard operating procedures (SOPs), forms and records come into play. Your SOPs serve to memorialize your operations for consistency. Most SOPs in the cannabis industry are not written by the actual operators of a process. Rather, they are written by the legal and compliance team without review by the operators to confirm that what they are stating reflects operational reality. The audience needs to be the operators. Without effective SOPs that are utilized by your employees, your business will struggle to meet the established specifications. Cannabis businesses in Colorado, the oldest regulated adult-use cannabis market in the United States, continue to see 1 in 8 of their products fail final product testing! Cannabis businesses that understand their processes, document them in SOPs and have records to prove they follow their SOPs (see Step 3) are able to reduce errors that ultimately lead to costly rework and product failures.

Consistency in quality standards requires meticulous SOPs

Step 3: Monitor and improve

You have your requirements, you have your process, but how do you know that they are being adhered to? By the time you have results from a third-party lab, it’s too late. Look internally. Records and logs that show preventive maintenance was performed, room and canopy temperature and humidity checks, inventory reports, production records, extraction equipment report and employee training records shouldn’t be filled out only to be filed away. These records are data, which is your most valuable tool. Unfortunately, records are one of the most overlooked assets in today’s cannabis business. A team independent from operations (typically a Quality Unit) should be regularly reviewing these for inconsistencies and trends that can alert you to catastrophic failures before they occur.

Initially, the additional expenditure and learning curve may make this seem like an added burden, but keep in mind that succeeding in today’s cannabis industry requires long-term customer retention. By biting off one piece at a time, you can slowly implement a QMS that will improve your business, increase customer satisfaction, and ensure your brand is a staple for years to come. Remember, quality and compliance is a journey, not a “set it and forget it” situation.

The definition of a Quality Management System includes ‘continuous improvement’. Look forward to a future article which will discuss the importance of tools like a CAPA Program – Corrective Action Preventive Action (which all cannabis license holders in Colorado are required to have in place as of January 1, 2021) and how they complete your QMS, keeping you compliant and mitigating your business risks!

Facility Considerations for Cultivation & Manufacturing: A Case Study

By David Vaillencourt
1 Comment

The cannabis industry is growing and evolving at an unprecedented pace and regulators, consumers and businesses continually struggle to keep up.

Cannabis businesses: How do you maintain an edge on the market, avoid costly mistakes?

Case Study: Costly Facility Build Out Oversights

David Vaillencourt will be joining a panel discussion, Integrated Lifecycle of Designing a Cultivation Operation, on December 22 during the Cannabis Quality Virtual Conference. Click here to register. A vertically integrated multi-state operator wants to produce edibles. The state requires adherence to food safety practices (side note – even if the state did not, adherence to food safety practices should be considered as a major facility and operational requirement). They are already successfully producing flower, tinctures and other oil derivatives. Their architect and MEP firm works with them to design a commercial kitchen for the production of safe edibles. The layout is confirmed, the equipment is specified – everything from storage racks, an oven and exhaust hoods, to food-grade tables. The concrete is poured and walls are constructed. The local health authority comes in to inspect the construction progress, who happens to have a background in industrial food-grade facilities (think General Mills). They remind the company that they must have three-compartment sinks with hot running water for effective cleaning and sanitation, known as clean-out-of-place (COP). The result? Partial demolition of the floor to run pipeline, and a retrofit to make room for the larger sinks, including redoing electrical work and a contentious team debate about the size of the existing equipment that was designed to fit ‘just right.’

Unfortunately, this is just one more common story our team recently witnessed. In this article, I outline a few recommendations and a process (Quality by Design) that could have reduced this and many other issues. For some, following the process may just be the difference between being profitable or going out of business in 2021.

The benefits of Quality by Design are tangible and measurable:

  1. Reduce mistakes that lead to costly re-work
  2. Mitigate inefficient operational flow
  3. Reduce the risk of cross-contamination and product mix-ups. It happens all the time without carefully laid out processes.
  4. Eliminate bottlenecks in your production process
  5. Mitigate the risk of a major recall.

The solution is in the process

Regardless of whether you fall in the category of a food producer, manufacturer of infused products (MIP), food producers, re-packager or even a cultivator, consider the following and ask these questions as a team.

People

Food processing and sanitation
By standardizing and documenting safety procedures, manufacturers mitigate the risk of cannabis-specific concerns

For every process, who is performing it? This may be a single individual or the role of specific people as defined in a job description.

Does the individual(s) performing the process have sufficient education and training? Do you have a diverse team that can provide different perspectives? World class operations are not developed in a vacuum, but rather with a team. Encourage healthy discourse and dialogue.

Process

Is the process defined? Perhaps in a standard operating procedure (SOP) or work instruction (WI). This is not the general guidance an equipment vendor provided you with, this is your process.

How well do you know your process? Does your SOP or WI specify (with numbers) how long to run the piece of equipment, the specification of the raw materials used (or not used) during the process, and what defines a successful output?

Do you have a system in place for when things deviate from the process? Processes are not foolproof. Do not get hung up on deviations from the process, but don’t turn a blind eye to them. Record and monitor them. In time, they will show you clear opportunities for improvement, preventing major catastrophes.

Materials

What are the raw materials being used? Where are they coming from (who is your supplier and how did you qualify them)?

Start with the raw materials that create your product or touch your product at all stages of the process. We have seen many cases where cannabis oils fail for heavy metals, specifically lead. Extractors are quick to blame the cultivator and their nutrients, as cannabis is a very effective phytoremediator (it uptakes heavy metals and toxins from soil substrate). The more likely culprit – your glassware! Storing cannabis oil, both work in process or final product in glass jars, while preferred over plastic, requires due diligence on the provider of your glassware. If they change the factory in which it is produced, will you be notified? Stipulate this in your contract. Don’t find yourself in the next cannabis lead recall that gets the attention of the FDA.

Savings is gained through simple control of your raw materials. Variability in your raw material going into the extractor is inevitable, but the more you can do to standardize the quality of your inputs, the less work re-formulating needs to be done downstream. Eliminate the constant need to troubleshoot why yields are lower than expected, or worst case, having to rerun or throw an entire batch out because it was “hot” (either too much THC in the hemp/CBD space or pesticides/heavy metals). These all add up to significant downstream bottlenecks – underutilized equipment, inefficient staff (increase in labor cost) all because of a lack of upstream controls. Use your current process as a starting point, but implement a quality system to drive improvement in operational efficiency and watch your top line grow while your bottom-line decreases.

Consistency in quality standards requires meticulous SOPs

Have you tested and confirmed the quality of your raw material? This isn’t just does it have THC and is it cannabis, but is it a certain particle size, moisture level, etc.? Again, define the quality of your raw materials (specifications) and test for it.

Rememberranges are your friend. It is much better to say 9-13% moisture than “about 10%”. For your most diligent extractor, 11% will be unacceptable, but for a guy that just wants to get the job done, 13% just may do!

Test your final product AFTER the process. Again, how does it stack up against your specifications? You may need to have multiple specifications based on different types of raw material. Perhaps one strain with a certain range of cannabinoids and terpenes can be expected for production.

Review the data and trend it. Are you getting lower yields than normal? This may be due to an issue with the equipment, maybe a blockage has formed somewhere, a valve is loose, and simple preventive maintenance will get you back up and running. Or, it could be that the raw biomass quality has changed. Either way, having that data available for review and analysis will allow you to identify the root cause and prevent a surprise failure of your equipment. Murphy’s law applies to the cannabis industry too.

  1. You are able to predict and prevent most failures before they occur
  2. You increase the longevity of your equipment
  3. You are able to predict with a level of confidence – imagine estimating how much product you will product next month and hitting that target – every time!
  4. Business risks are significantly mitigated – a process that spews out metal, concentrates heavy metals or does not kill microbes that were in the raw material is an expensive mistake.
  5. Your employees don’t feel like they are running around with their hair on fire all the time. It’s expensive to train new employees. Reduce your turnover with a less stressed-out team.

Takeaways

Maintaining a competitive edge in the cannabis industry is not easy, but it can be made easier with the right team, tools and data. Our recommendations boil down to a few simple steps:

  1. Make sure you have a chemical or mechanical engineer to understand, optimize and standardize your process (you should have one of these on staff permanently!)
  2. Implement a testing program for all raw materials
    1. Test your raw materials – cannabis flower, solvents, additives, etc. before using. Work with your team to understand what you should and should not test for, and the frequency for doing so. Some materials/vendors are likely more consistent or reliable than others. Test the less reliable ones more frequently (or even every time!)
  3. Test your final product after you extract it – Just because your local regulatory body does not require a certain test, it does not mean you should not look for it. Anything that you specified wanting the product to achieve needs to be tested at an established frequency (and this does not necessarily need to be every batch).
  4. Repeat, and record all of your extraction parameters.
  5. Review, approve and set a system in place for monitoring any changes.

Congratulations, you have just gone through the process of validating your operation. You may now begin to realize the benefits of validating your operation, from your personnel to your equipment and processes.