To get started, a couple of key definitions from the rules:
“Manufacture” means the production, preparation, propagation, or compounding of cannabis products. The term “manufacture” includes the following:
- Extraction processes;
- Infusion processes;
- Packaging or repackaging of manufactured medical cannabis or medical cannabis products.
“Edible Cannabis Product” means manufactured cannabis intended to be used, in whole or in part, for human consumption.
In addition to extensive sanitation, recall, customer complaint and operational requirements for edibles manufacturers, the proposed rules include quite a list of prohibited products and based on our experience in other states with regulated cannabis, we anticipate the list will only grow over time. Here is a sampling of some of the products that will not be allowed under the proposed manufacturing rules:
- Cannabis-infused alcoholic beverages;
- Cannabis products containing any non-cannabinoid additive that increases potency, toxicity or addictive potential, or that would create an unsafe combination with other psychoactive substances, including nicotine and caffeine;
- Cannabis products that must be held below 41 degrees Fahrenheit to be safe for human consumption;
- Vacuum packed products;
- Canned cannabis products;
- Cannabis-infused juice;
- Perishable bakery products that must be held at temperatures below 41 degrees Fahrenheit, including cream or custard-filled pies, pies or pastries which consist in whole or in part of milk or milk products, eggs, or synthetic fillings, or meat-filled pies or pastries;
- Dairy products of any kind (yes, this appears to include butter);
- Meat products;
- Seafood products.
For obvious reasons, the issue of whether or not cannabis-infused butter will be allowed is a big one. Though cannabis butter would be prohibited under the current draft rules, we’ve seen other states, like Washington, carve out exceptions for products made with cannabis butter. However, even Washington prohibits selling cannabis butter as a stand-alone product.
One other glaring omission from the current rules is a prohibition on cannabis products that appeal to children, although this legislation is likely coming down the pipeline. Many states prohibit products like gummy bears and lollipops that mimic candies appealing to children. Though California seems to be taking a less restrictive approach than other states in which my firm’s cannabis lawyers work, it’s highly unlikely it will leave this issue completely unaddressed. In this vein, California’s proposed rules do prohibit licensees from manufacturing cannabis products by applying cannabinoid concentrate or extract to commercially available snack candy or food items. Though the definition of “commercially available” is not entirely clear, at least part of the intent here is to prevent consumer confusion between cannabis-infused and non-cannabis products present in many homes – children are often the ones confused in this manner.
Ultimately, many California cannabis manufacturers will need to rethink the types of products they offer for sale once they begin operating with a state license. Many of the products currently on the market here simply will not comply with the new rules, and a thorough understanding of what products are prohibited will be critical to developing a viable business plan as a cannabis manufacturing licensee.
Link – Canna Law Blog
