Connecticut’s Cannabis Producers Can’t Pass Testing. So the State Is Removing It

CT CannaTimes Editor - 4.16.2026

Connecticut lawmakers are advancing a cannabis amendment that quietly does something extraordinary.

It removes specific testing requirements from state law, including mold, pesticides, heavy metals, and even the methods used to detect them.

At the same time, it allows cannabis that fails testing to be fixed and sold anyway.

This is not interpretation. It is written directly into the amendment to House Bill 5350 (LCO 3758).

Here is what the bill actually does.

The State Is Deleting Contamination Testing From Law

Current Connecticut law explicitly requires cannabis to be tested for contamination.

That language is now being deleted.

The amendment removes the following requirement:

“A cannabis testing laboratory shall test each marijuana sample… for microbiological contaminants, mycotoxins, heavy metals and pesticide chemical residue…”

It also removes mold specific testing requirements:

“Microbiological contaminant testing… shall include… Aspergillus species…”

And it removes the required testing method:

“The marijuana sample shall be tested by using… quantitative polymerase chain reaction…”

All of this language is struck from the statute.

(LCO 3758, Section 44, pages 29 to 30)

What Replaces It

After deleting those requirements, the bill replaces them with a single line:

“Each cannabis establishment shall submit cannabis samples… in accordance with the laboratory testing standards established in the regulations adopted by the Commissioner…”

(LCO 3758, Section 44(a), page 29)

What Changed

Before this amendment, Connecticut law required:

• Testing for mold, including Aspergillus
• Testing for pesticides
• Testing for heavy metals

Defined laboratory methods for detecting contamination

After this amendment, none of those requirements exist in statute.

All testing standards are now determined by the Commissioner through regulation, not law.

Failed Cannabis No Longer Has to Be Destroyed

The bill also changes what happens when cannabis fails testing.

It now allows producers to fix contaminated product and try again.

“If a cannabis sample fails… the cannabis establishment shall… submit… a remediation plan… and… remediate the cannabis batch… and repeat testing…”

(LCO 3758, Section 44(b)(2), page 30)

If the product passes after remediation:

“If all repeated testing yields satisfactory results, the cannabis batch… shall be released for sale.”

(LCO 3758, Section 44(b), page 30)

The State Can Approve Remediation Without Responding

The bill includes a provision that allows remediation to be approved automatically.

“If the commissioner does not send… notice… within ten business days… such remediation plan shall be deemed approved.”

(LCO 3758, Section 44(b)(2), page 30)

In other words, if the state does nothing, the remediation is approved by default.

Mold Contamination Is Shifted to Disclosure, Not Prevention

The amendment no longer sets contamination limits in statute.

Instead, it directs regulators to focus on disclosure:

“Establishing consumer disclosures concerning mold and yeast in cannabis”

(LCO 3758, Section 74, page 72)

This is a fundamental shift.

From preventing contaminated cannabis

To informing consumers about it

Radiation Treatment Is Now Explicitly Allowed

The bill also authorizes a controversial remediation method.

“Permitted remediation practices… shall include… remediation… by way of one or more exposures to ionizing radiation…”

(LCO 3758, Section 75, page 77)

Cannabis that fails microbial testing can now be treated with radiation and then sold if it passes afterward.

The Bottom Line

This amendment makes three major structural changes to Connecticut’s cannabis system.

It removes specific testing requirements from law

It allows contaminated cannabis to be remediated instead of destroyed

It shifts safety standards from statute to agency discretion

At the same time, it explicitly allows radiation based remediation and moves part of the system from contamination limits to disclosure.

These are not minor adjustments.

They are a fundamental rewrite of how cannabis safety is defined, enforced, and controlled in Connecticut.