« Delegitimizing Trump | Main | Scattershots – 6may17 (updated 8may17) »

03 May 2017

Comments

Bill Tozer

Duh, we are know you ain't no Progressive Pothole Snowflake Loser, young lady. First clue is the armpit hair is neither braided nor looks like an oversized Brillo pad. In fact, it's shaved and your appearance is most presentable. I am impressed. You go girl. A lady got to do what a lady gotta do. We harbor no ill will.

https://www.facebook.com/lastamericapatriots/photos/a.235087906641439.1073741826.235086849974878/844933005656923/?type=3&theater

My Gal is back and looking fine. HRC in 2020!!

https://www.facebook.com/RowdyConservatives/photos/a.217983685002343.55586.217926015008110/1081990231935013/?type=3&theater

Account Deleted

PE at 12:03 - "It will be the most taxed and regulated consumer item in our history before our Liberal State government is done with it."
Wanna bet?
As if Paul has one clue about the taxes and regulations of existing consumer items.
Start with the dairy industry, Paul. Do some research on how many regs and taxes exist in that industry. I dare you. It will involve studying and legwork. And interviewing people working in all aspects of that commodity.
It's what 'news' folk used to do.
What a frickin' joke you lefties are. Get stoned and look up what Mother Jones and Daily Kos tell you.
Pathetic.

jon smith

Scott May 7, 7:21 I have more than a few fingers in the dairy industry from leasing grazing allotments to wholesaling finished products such as cream and cheese. Please educate me on the undo "regs and taxes" you imply that we incur. Yes, we have regulatory burden, but no more onerous than many sectors. I'm also involved in the production of asphalt shingles. Want to hear about some regulatory hurdles? I still don't complain when looking into the reason for these concerns.

Account Deleted

Oh Jonnie boy - please go back and read the posts. My post was responding to Paul's idea that MJ will be the MOST regulated and taxed consumer product in California.
Your argument against me is fabricated out of thin air. Exactly what part of my post implied 'undo' (sic) regs and taxes?
Since you are the dairy expert around here, maybe you can tell us if Paul is correct or not?
"I still don't complain when looking into the reason for these concerns."
Good for you - what was my complaint?

Paul Emery

Scott

Have you checked out the latest regs and taxes on RMJ?

Paul Emery

Here's just a start Scott


California Cannabis: The Marijuana Manufacturing Rules (Part I)
A useful tutorial, with even more information to come.

By Hilary Bricken


Last week, I wrote about the long-awaited release of California’s initial medical cannabis rules to regulate retailers, distributors, transporters, manufacturers, and cultivators. This is the first in what will be a series of posts regarding California’s new medical cannabis rules. I’m kicking things off with what you need to know to get a California cannabis manufacturing license. And if you want a deep dive on all of California’s initial licensing rules, join my firm and me on June 1 for a free webinar on this topic.

Though California’s Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MCRSA“) initially failed to specifically define the term “manufacturer,” California rectified this by issuing MCRSA manufacturing rules last Friday. Under these rules, “manufacturer” now means the production, preparation, propagation, or compounding of cannabis products, including extraction processes, infusion processes, the packaging or repackaging of manufactured medical cannabis or medical cannabis products, and labeling or relabeling the packages of manufactured medical cannabis or medical cannabis products. “Manufacturing” or “manufacturing operation” means all aspects of the extraction and/or infusion processes, including processing, preparing, holding, storing, packaging, or labeling of cannabis products. Manufacturing also includes any processing, preparing, holding, or storing of components and ingredients.

Thanks to these new draft rules, we now also know what nonvolatile and volatile solvents mean, which terms were previously undefined in the MCRSA. This is important because it will determine the California cannabis manufacturing license you will get. “Nonvolatile solvent” means any solvent used in the extraction process that is not a volatile solvent, including carbon dioxide. “Volatile solvent” means any solvent that is or produces a flammable gas or vapor that when present in the air in sufficient quantities will create explosive or ignitable mixtures. The state’s examples of volatile solvents include, butane, hexane, propane, and ethanol. A Type 6 cannabis manufacturing licensee can only use nonvolatile solvents, but a Type 7 licensee can use both nonvolatile and volatile solvents in its extractions and infusions.

There are also additional manufacturing license types in the initial rules that weren’t included in the MCRSA. A “Type P” license is for entities that only package or repackage medical cannabis products or label or relabel the cannabis product container to go to retail. Entities that engage in packaging or labeling of their own product as part of the manufacturing process do not need to hold a separate Type P license. There is also a “Type N” license for manufacturers that produce edible products or topical products using infusion processes, or other types of medical cannabis products other than extracts or concentrates, and that do not conduct extractions. The Type P and Type N licenses are subject to the same restrictions as a Type 6 license.

Overall, only certain kinds of extractions are allowed for the manufacturing licensee. The state mandates the only cannabis manufacturing allowed is mechanical extraction, such as screens or presses; chemical extraction using a nonvolatile solvent such as a nonhydrocarbon-based or other solvent such as water, vegetable glycerin, vegetable oils, animal fats, or food-grade glycerin; chemical extraction using a professional closed loop CO2 gas extraction systems; chemical extraction using a volatile solvent; and any other method authorized by the state. All chemical extractions must take place within a professional, closed-loop system, which also has its own state law requirements. The rules also contain strict packaging and labeling requirements, require all personnel to be sufficiently trained, and mandate manufacturing licensees must ensure strict quality assurance processes and protocol, including for cannabis product recalls and complaints.

Importantly, the manufacturing rules also tell us what kinds of manufactured products can be on the market in addition to their potency limitations. California is not going to allow cannabis-infused alcohol, caffeine, or nicotine products and no cannabis product can be made of “potentially hazardous food.” Potentially hazardous food means any food “capable of supporting the growth of infectious or toxigenic microorganisms when held at temperatures above 41 degrees Fahrenheit.” Products that must be refrigerated at a temperature of less than 41 degrees and any dairy or meat products are also not allowed. Edibles cannot contain more than 10 milligrams of THC per serving or more than one hundred 100 milligrams of THC per package of finished product. And, for non-edible manufactured cannabis, no finished package can contain more than 1000 milligrams of THC.

Lastly, the initial licensing fee for a manufacturer license applicant is $1,000 for each application filed. Then the annual license fee is on a sliding scale based on the licensee’s annual gross revenue, starting at $2,000 if you’re making up to $100,000 on up to a $50,000 annual license fee if you’re making over $5 million yearly.

California’s cannabis manufacturing rules closely track what has already been done in many other regulated cannabis states and even mirror some of the manufacturing regulations in the adult use states. And, though these are just the initial rules, I do not anticipate much change other than the probable addition of more prohibited products to the list of no-gos, such as other states have done when it comes to gummy bears or other products that may appeal to kids

Account Deleted

Hilarious, Paul.
Ooooh - what a lot of regulations!
Just maybe Paul, you'll start to understand that your little list of regs is nothing to compare to what other industries already operate under.
You claimed in your post that MJ is going to be the most regulated consumer product in California. While I certainly won't argue that it will be heavily regulated, because, after all this IS California - that list is only one side.
You need to check out the regs for all other products and services in California to make your point.
Your obsession with MJ is certainly worrisome.
George's original point is that Cali govt is not economically sustainable - the ship is sinking.
You worry about the deck chair arrangement.

ScenesFromTheApocalypse

"your little list of regs is nothing to compare to what other industries already operate under."

A cozy evening with a glass of wine and the California building code might be a good start.

Bill Tozer

Those regs are nothing. In Washington State, the state inspectors (chemists) come by every warehouse grow and test for any residue of insecticide, herbaside, or non organic fertilizer. If there is but the faintest minuscule hint of anything not 100% organic, the whole patch must be destroyed on the spot. Been doing that for years. The grows are inspected and tested with such regularity that it would be a stretch to call them 'random'.

When CO had a shortage, the state issued but 16 or so permits for small greenhouse growers with a limit of 20 plants max for the season. The big boys in those big fancy smancy warehouses get the cream off the top year in, year out.

Now, as someone who used to lay firebrick (tile) with expory grout only allowed in dairy plants (milk, ice cream, yogurt, powdered milk, butter, cottage cheese, etc. producers), I came across a dilemma. Was doing an ice cream bar on a stick manufacturer with the USDA and State requiring the usual only tile, firebrick, epoxy, plastic and stainless allowed on the floor and walls inside. No problem. But Cal-OSHA steps in and says it is too loud in there and they need something on the walls to absorb the noise for the workers. Violation of noise standards. Health Department/USDA says nothing that can hold bacteria, nix the noise protection. Cal-OSHA says.......round and round the mulberry bush, the monkey chased the weasel. Bottom line: I got paid, was given a couple boxes of ice cream bars, and it sucks to make something delicious in CA. Never heard how it got resolved....and that was 18 years ago.
Dial Tile closed up its plant north of the new Roseville Mall about the same time. They made ceramic tile. Closed shop in CA cause they literally got closed down by regs and headed off to some other state.

Bill Tozer

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/california/articles/2017-05-09/california-officials-oroville-dam-not-reliable-for-flooding

Bill Tozer

http://www.agenda21radio.news/2017/05/13/state-officials-get-slammed-for-the-oroville-dam-spillway-failure-at-sacramento-hearing/


George Rebane

BillT 130pm - you are pouring gasoline on the fires of rank, broad-based, and ingrained government incompetence long burning in these pages. And about what should the sentient reader wish to be further exercised on this issue? Consider that these retards will not suffer one whit for their carelessness, and will go on to collect their outlandish pensions that contribute to our state's unfunded obligations.

Gregory

When will RMJ come under USDA marketing orders, that New Deal monstrosity that has controlled the growing and selling of all sorts of products. Paul dumps on LaMalfa Farms for daring to grow rice, one of the crops FDR's people thought the executive branch of the Federal Government should control for the good of the people. You know, make sure farmers didn't go broke, the people could be assured of bread, milk, cheese, raisins.

Not sure of the current details but it wasn't all that long ago that if you wanted to grow hops... you couldn't actually sell them unless you bought the right to sell the quantity you wanted to sell from an existing grower who had those rights.

How did PJO'R put it? ... if buying and selling is controlled by legislation, the first things that get bought and sold are legislators.

Paul, how does that sound to you?

Now, along with all of those purity and THC testing and labeling restrictions getting in place... what about labeling and shelf life with instructions for temperature and humidity.... and testing for molds. Liability too, and how does one determine the user's illness is caused by that faulty product being sold to them for eating or smoking, the latter being not exactly healthy for lungs of living things.

What sort of liability insurance are the NSJ stoner-growers going to be required to carry?

Welcome to the double edged sword of the power of government.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad