BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2679
Page 1
(Without Reference to File)
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
2679 (Cooley, et al.)
As Amended August 19, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |79-0 |(May 5, 2016) |SENATE: |32-7 |(August 29, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
|COMMITTEE |16-0 |(August 31, |RECOMMENDATION: |concur |
|VOTE: | |2016) | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Health
Original Committee Reference: B. & P.
SUMMARY: Exempts collectives or cooperatives that manufacture
medical cannabis products from certain criminal sanctions, if
AB 2679
Page 2
specific requirements are met; requires agencies with regulatory
responsibilities under the Medical Cannabis Regulation and
Safety Act (MCRSA) to include additional information in their
existing reporting requirements to the Legislature, and,
authorizes the University of California (UC) to ascertain the
effect of marijuana on motor skills within its existing
authority to study the efficacy and safety of administering
medical marijuana. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits a collective or cooperative that manufactures
medical cannabis products, as specified, from being subject to
state criminal sanctions, as specified, if the collective or
cooperative abides by all of the following requirements:
a) The collective or cooperative does either or both of the
following:
i) Utilizes only manufacturing processes that are
either solventless or that employ nonflammable, nontoxic
solvents that are generally recognized as safe pursuant
to the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as
specified.
ii) Utilizes only manufacturing processes that use
solvents exclusively within a closed-loop system that
meets all of the following requirements:
(1) The system uses only solvents that are
generally recognized as safe pursuant to the federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as specified;
(2) The system is designed to recapture and
contain solvents during the manufacturing process, and
otherwise prevent the off-gassing of solvents into the
ambient atmosphere to mitigate the risks of ignition
and explosion during the manufacturing process;
AB 2679
Page 3
(3) A licensed engineer certifies that the system
was commercially manufactured, safe for its intended
use, and built to codes of recognized and generally
accepted good engineering practices, including but not
limited to the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers; the American National Standards Institute;
Underwriters Laboratories; the American Society for
Testing and Materials, or Occupational Safety and
Health Administration Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratories; and,
(4) The system has a certification document that
contains the signature and stamp of a professional
engineer and the serial number of the extraction unit
being certified.
b) The collective or cooperative receives and maintains
approval from the local fire official for the closed-loop
system, other equipment, the extraction operation and the
facility;
c) The collective or cooperative meets required fire,
safety, and building code requirements, as specified;
d) The collective or cooperative is in possession of a
valid seller's permit issued by the Board of Equalization;
and,
e) The collective or cooperative is in possession of a
valid local license, permit or other authorization specific
to the manufacturing of medical cannabis products, and in
compliance with any additional conditions imposed by the
city or county issuing the local license, permit, or other
authorization.
AB 2679
Page 4
2)Defines "manufacturing" as the compounding, converting,
producing, deriving, processing or preparing, either directly
or indirectly by chemical extraction or independently by means
of chemical synthesis, medical cannabis products.
3)Requires licensing and regulatory entities with jurisdiction
over the MCRSA to include in their existing reporting
requirements to the Legislature the following: a) the number
of appeals from the denial of state licenses or other
disciplinary actions taken by the licensing authority, and the
average time spent on these appeals; and, b) the number of
complaints submitted by citizens or representatives of cities
or counties regarding licensees, provided as both a
comprehensive statewide number and by geographical region.
4)Authorizes the University of California (UC), pursuant to its
existing authority to study the efficacy and safety of
administering medical marijuana, to include studies to
ascertain the effect of marijuana on motor skills.
The Senate amendments exempt collectives or cooperatives that
manufacture cannabis by chemical extraction from specified
criminal sanctions.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the MCRSA (formerly referred to as the Medical
Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act) to regulate medical
cannabis in California, including its cultivation,
transportation, storage, distribution, and sale, as specified
in AB 243 (Wood), Chapter 688, Statutes of 2015; AB 266
(Bonta), Chapter 689, Statutes of 2015; and, SB 643 (McGuire),
Chapter 719, Statutes of 2015.
2)Establishes within the Department of Consumer Affairs the
AB 2679
Page 5
Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation (Bureau) for the
licensure and regulation of medical cannabis.
3)Requires each licensing authority under MCRSA to prepare and
submit to the Legislature an annual report on specified
information, including the number of state licensees issued,
renewed, suspended or revoked; the number and type of
enforcement activities; and, the average time it takes to
process state license applications.
4)Establishes the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research within
the UC to study the efficacy and safety of administering
marijuana as part of a medical treatment.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee analysis of a previous version of this bill which
included the reporting requirements, this bill will have minor
costs to the Department of Public Health and the California
Department of Food and Agriculture to report specified
information (fee-supported special funds). This bill in its
current form was not heard in the Senate Appropriations
Committee and was placed on second reading file pursuant to
Senate Rule 28.8, which indicates this bill has negligible state
costs.
COMMENTS: According to the author, the MCRSA was a huge step
forward in regulating the medical cannabis industry which has
effectively operated in a legal gray area since the Passage of
Proposition 215. The MCRSA's passage last year created a robust
administrative and regulatory structure at the state and local
level over this industry. As the Bureau ramps up licensure
programs and puts regulations in place, it is important that
local governments have clarification about what types of
manufacturing and extraction are allowed. With this bill, we
have set new standards for medical cannabis manufacturers to
follow and have provided new clarity for local governments when
issuing local licenses. Additionally, accountability and
oversight is important to ensure that this new Bureau is
AB 2679
Page 6
functioning efficiently and that community input is being
effectively considered and tracked.
Health and Safety Code Section 11358 provides that the
processing of any part of marijuana, except as provided by law,
is a criminal act. SB 420 (Vasconcellos), Chapter 875, Statutes
of 2003, exempted from specified criminal sanctions, including
criminal sanctions relating to processing, patients with
identification cards, and their designated primary caregivers,
who associate within the State of California in order
collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical
purposes. This exemption from criminal sanction however, does
not apply to the manufacturing of any controlled substance
(including cannabis) by chemical synthesis. According to the
authors, the lack of state protections continues to impact
manufacturers. For example, in mid-June of this year, a medical
cannabis manufacturer who was in compliance with the local
ordinance was raided on the suspicion of conducting extraction
by chemical synthesis. Additionally, due to the illegal status
of medical cannabis manufacturing, local governments have faced
difficulty in differentiating between legitimate operators and
illegitimate ones, due to a lack of clear standards for conduct.
The authors also cite the decision in People v. Bergen (166
Cal.App.4th 161), as an illustration of the need for this bill.
In that case, the defendant manufactured concentrated cannabis
(hash oil or honey oil) by using butane to extract the resin
containing the psychoactive ingredient tetrahydrocannabinol from
marijuana plant material. The court imposed a harsher penalty
because of the use of chemicals in producing the concentrated
cannabis.
Analysis Prepared by:
Rosielyn Pulmano / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097 FN:
0005022
AB 2679
Page 7