Oklahoma industry urges OMA to change lab testing rules, citing inflated THC readings and narrow equipment mandates

Executive Director Adria Barry and staff opened a Feb. 16 public‑comment hearing and heard hours of objections to proposed testing provisions in Title 442, Chapter 10.

Laboratory owners and technicians said the proposed internal retest trigger and QA thresholds are too high and could hide widespread THC 'inflation' they say now distorts the market. "Currently it's stating that labs should internally retest samples at 30% THC, and that the QA lab should be testing at 32.5% THC," said Jeffrey Havard, lab manager and owner of Havard Industries, who proposed an alternate internal retest range of 22.5–25% and QA intervention at 25.1% to address what he called inflated labels.

Multiple commenters cautioned against agency rules that prescribe specific equipment or analytical protocols. "Any attempt to specify the type of equipment or protocols we must use are just killing innovation," said Dalton Hilburn, a senior technician at Havard Industries, arguing proficiency testing already ensures valid results.

Laboratory directors also pressed the Authority on metals‑analysis and retest policies. Brandon Mosley of Baseline Laboratories objected to a mandate limiting metals testing to ICP‑MS (inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry), saying his lab’s ICP‑OES method meets proficiency requirements. "We pass all the proficiencies with OES," he said, urging the agency to allow multiple detectors rather than a single mandated technology.

Cole Allman, laboratory director at Oklahoma Compliance Testing Laboratory, criticized a proposal that would bar further testing of a batch after a failing retest. He called the rule scientifically unsupported and said remediation, extraction or additional testing can render products safe: "This one‑and‑done retesting policy hurts the small businesses the most."

Processors and extractors asked the Authority to recognize industry terminology and handling realities. Kelsey Palmer (OKAF Inc./Apothecary Extracts) asked the rules use the term "fresh frozen" rather than "flash frozen" and to permit a 48‑hour window for delivery of frozen harvest samples to testing labs to maintain sample integrity.

Speakers urged more robust auditing, reserve sample retesting, and better chain‑of‑custody practices to determine whether anomalous results stem from growers, labs, dispensaries or storage. Sample‑size rules were also contested: several lab speakers said sample‑size decisions should be determined internally by labs based on ISO validation rather than a fixed gram requirement.

The Authority accepted public comment through 5 PM the same day and will review submissions in totality before deciding rule changes. Barrett Brown, chief of staff, reminded attendees that agencies cannot adopt changes outside the notice of rulemaking intent or in conflict with statute.