Local pot advocates applauded the federal government Thursday after it announced new rules that will allow patients to grow medical marijuana for their own use, or designate a grower to do so for them.

The Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations go into effect on Aug. 24, replacing the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations.

Under the ACMPR, patients who have been authorized by a doctor to access medical cannabis will be allowed to produce a limited amount of pot for personal use, or designate a grower to produce it for them. Those wishing to grow their own medical cannabis will need to first register with Health Canada.

Dispensaries and compassion clubs, however, remain illegal.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency denied two petitions to reschedule cannabis from Schedule I, according to an announcement released by the organization Aug. 11. This denial means maintaining the DEA’s current stance that marijuana has no medical value. The DEA also increased the number of registered manufacturers supplying marijuana for research.

The 2011 petition came from former state governors Lincoln Chafee (Rhode Island) and Christine Gregoire (Washington), requesting the DEA remove marijuana from Schedule I, based on their assertion that cannabis has accepted medical use in the United States, according to the DEA’s ruling. 

The DEA collected data and recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). That recommendation concluded that marijuana has a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use.

Based on that result, “the DEA has concluded that there is no substantial evidence that marijuana should be removed from Schedule I,” according to the document.

“Enormous weight” was given to the Food and Drug Administration’s conclusions that marijuana has “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,” DEA chief Chuck Rosenberg told NPR.

“This decision isn’t based on danger. This decision is based on whether marijuana, as determined by the FDA, is a safe and effective medicine,” he said in the NPR interview, “and it’s not.”

Although the DEA has kept marijuana legally listed as a Schedule I drug, the announcement relaxed some research restrictions by expanding the number of authorized marijuana manufacturers for studies. Currently, the only institution legally allowed to grow marijuana for study purposes has been the University of Mississippi.

Under the new rules, potential manufacturers must apply for DEA registration. Though no total number of manufacturers is given, registration will be limited to a number that produces “an adequate and uninterrupted supply of these substances under adequately competitive conditions for legitimate medical, scientific, research, and industrial purposes,” according to the policy announcement. 

Among the factors to be considered are whether the applicant has a history of legally handling controlled substances, including a criminal history. The announcement states that having illegal activity in a manufacturer’s background doesn’t automatically disqualify them, but will weigh heavily in the decision.

Applicants also will be asked to explain how they believe they would be able to augment the nation’s supply of research-grade cannabis, along with other relevant information, according to the announcement.

Growers would be allowed to operate independently, as long as that grower agrees to only distribute marijuana with prior approval from the DEA, and only to DEA-registered researchers.

To apply for registration with the DEA, go to www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/drugreg/index.html#regapps and submit Form 225.

Marijuana proponents were disappointed with the denials, including National Cannabis Industry Association Executive Director Aaron Smith.

“DEA’s decision flies in the face of objective science and overwhelming public opinion,” he said in a statement. “The reality is that half of U.S. states have already passed effective laws allowing patients legal access to medical cannabis, and it is changing lives.

“Continuing marijuana prohibition forces critically ill people to suffer needlessly, leaves life-changing treatments undeveloped, and keeps patients and providers in limbo between state and federal laws,” Smith said.

"The DEA's refusal to remove marijuana from Schedule I is, quite frankly, mind-boggling," said Mason Tvert, spokesperson for Marijuana Policy Project in a statement.

The expansion of manufacturers for research-grade marijuana will provide the potential for research that could change future policy, said Michael Collins, deputy director of Drug Policy Alliance in an email to DPA constituents.

“For decades, the DEA has promoted an unjustified monopoly on research-grade marijuana for use in federally-approved studies – making it impossible for scientists to put marijuana through clinical trials to demonstrate it meets FDA standards for medical safety and efficacy,” said Collins. “And the DEA only permitted one facility to supply marijuana to scientists which is operated by the National Institute on Drug Abuse – which also has a long track record of obstructing medical marijuana research.

“Today’s announcement will help eliminate the marijuana research barriers that the DEA and NIDA have unnecessarily and unjustifiably promoted for decades,” he said.

But that expansion isn’t enough to make up for the denial of overall rescheduling, according to Tvert.

“The DEA’s announcement is a little sweet, but mostly bitter,” he said. “Praising them for it would be like rewarding a student who failed an exam and agreed to cheat less on the next one. Removing barriers to research is a step forward, but the decision does not go nearly far enough. Marijuana should be completely removed from the CSA drug schedules and regulated similarly to alcohol.”

In his email, Collins commented, "Keeping marijuana in Schedule I shows that the DEA continues to ignore research, science, and growing public and political opinion. Marijuana should be descheduled and states should be allowed to set their own policies."

“Eighty-three years ago, Arizona voters approved a ballot measure to repeal the failed policy of alcohol prohibition,” said J.P. Holyoak, chairman of the Yes on 205 campaign, in the press release. “This November, we will have the opportunity to end the equally disastrous policy of marijuana prohibition. Prop 205 would establish a more sensible system,” Holyoak said. 

The Yes on 205 campaign will kick off today with a press conference in Phoenix. Campaign leaders will be joined by a 23-year-veteran of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, a physician and a teacher, who will discuss why they support replacing prohibition with the proposed legally regulated system. 

Prop 205 also would enable adults in the state to grow up to six marijuana plants, with a maximum of 12 plants permitted per residence. 

It would establish a Department of Marijuana Licenses and Control to oversee the system of licensed marijuana retail stores, licensed cultivation facilities, licensed product manufacturing facilities, and licensed testing facilities, according to the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol’s website. 

The number of retail stores licensed to sell marijuana to adults will be capped at 10 percent of the number of liquor store licenses, which is currently fewer than 180.

According to the initiative’s full text, “The Department shall begin accepting and processing applications for up to one of each type of marijuana establishment from each reorganized marijuana business on or before Sept. 1, 2017. The Department shall accept an application for up to one of each type of marijuana establishment for each dispensary registration certificate held by such nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary. The Department shall begin accepting and processing applications for marijuana establishments from all other applicants on and after Dec. 1, 2017.”    

The proposition also would establish a statewide tiered system for marijuana cultivator licenses that would, according to the proposition text:
              (a)         establish at least 3 different licensing class tiers.
              (b)        establish a limit on the amount of marijuana that a marijuana cultivator within each licensing class tier may produce based on the size of the cultivation area, except that the highest tier shall permit the production of an unlimited amount of marijuana.
              (c)         unless the licensee is a reorganized marijuana business, issue only the smallest licensing class tier marijuana cultivator license to a licensee until the licensee demonstrates to the department that the licensee has sold more than eighty-five percent of the marijuana the licensee has produced to marijuana establishments without engaging in any transaction at a price which is less than the marijuana cultivator’s cost to produce the marijuana sold in the transaction.
              (d)        provides for the issuance of the highest tier marijuana cultivator license to a reorganized marijuana business.

Municipalities will be able to impose limits on marijuana business locations. The proposition text explains: “A locality may prohibit the operation of one or more of the types of marijuana establishments within the locality, except that if a locality prohibits the operation of a marijuana retailer, a marijuana product manufacturer, or a marijuana cultivator it may not prohibit a reorganized marijuana business established by a nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary operating within the locality from operating the prohibited type of marijuana establishment within the locality in any area that is zoned to allow the operation of a nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary.”

Localities may also “limit the number of marijuana establishments within the locality, except that the locality may not limit the number of marijuana retailers, marijuana product manufacturers, or marijuana cultivators to a number that is less than the number of locations where nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries are engaged in the same type of conduct in the locality on the effective date of this chapter,” according to the Proposition text. 

A tiered schedule of annual licensing fees for cultivators also will be established, with fee amounts “relative to the size of the licensed cultivation area,” Prop 205 specifies. “The Department may require payment of an annual licensing fee of not more than $30,000 for the initial issuance of a license for a marijuana cultivator or $10,000 for a renewal license for a marijuana cultivator. The maximum fee amount for the lowest tier specified in the schedule may not be more than one-quarter of the annual licensing fee for the highest tier specified in the schedule.”

The Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee estimated the initiative would generate more than $123 million in annual tax revenue and license fees by 2020, including more than $55 million per year for K-12 education and full-day kindergarten programs, according to the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol. 

“The initiative does not enact a tax on the sale of medical marijuana or affect the rights of medical marijuana patients that were established by Proposition 203,” according to the campaign's website.

“Arizona patients spent $215 million on 19 tons of medical pot last year, nearly double the 10 tons purchased in 2014,” reported Tucson.com in February. The website also reported that Arizona’s medical marijuana program servers nearly 90,00 patients. The state’s medical marijuana program, established under Proposition 203, was voted into law in 2010 by Arizona voters. 

The proposition also would not change laws regarding driving under the influence of marijuana; impaired driving will remain illegal. 

By Brian MacIver

U.S. cannabis growers who felt left out of their state’s regulation creation process now have the opportunity to help shape a national cannabis policy. Just not their own.

In late June, the Canadian government Task Force on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation asked for help to develop Canada’s recreational marijuana policy in the form of a discussion paper. Canadian citizens, not just those of voting age, as well as industry experts are welcomed to analyze the 27-page document and fill out a survey at the end of every section that will shape the country’s recreational cannabis policy. The “industry experts” category also includes U.S.-based growers, according to Luc Labelle, a Canadian government spokesperson. 

“In order to provide the best possible advice to the Government of Canada, the Task Force is encouraging all those with views and experience in the areas being studied to participate in the online consultation, regardless of their location,” Labelle told Cannabis Business Times in an email.

Some of the topics up for discussion include minimizing harms of use, enforcing public safety and designing an effective distribution system.

But some experts north of 45 wonder how useful the survey answers are going to be, as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau already seems to have his heart set on a few points. During an interview with French-Canadian newspaper La Presse, he said he was in favor of having recreational cannabis sold at the provincially run liquor stores.

“If adults can freely buy marijuana in places like the SAQ [Quebec's provincially run liquor stores], pushers will no longer have the capacity to sell it to adults, and only selling it to young people will be both risky and less profitable,” Trudeau said in the interview in February.

But such a system shouldn’t be forced upon the provinces, according to NORML Canada’s Executive Director Craig Jones. “I think it really should devolve to the provinces to figure out what is the best model of distribution for the incredible variety of settings in which they intend to vend.”

The Canadian government also tipped its hand as to how it will approach recreational cannabis legalization in its selection of Task Force members: a former Attorney General and Minister of Justice, drug policy researchers, public safety officials (including former police officers), mental health experts and only one doctor with expertise in pain management and cannabinoids. 

No representatives of Canada’ strong medical producer network were invited as members of the Task Force. Although Jones is not fazed by it.

“The industry doesn’t come in the front door,” he says, “They have so many points of access in the parliamentary system. … They don’t really need to be attending, although for legitimization purposes they want to be around the table.”

Despite Prime Minister Trudeau’s propositions and the makeup of the Task Force, “no decisions on any aspect of the design of a new system have been made,” says Health Canada Media Relations Chief Eric Morissette.
Ultimately, “this survey just might be a way to appease the people,” says Jones, “but having as many people answer it as possible definitely can’t hurt.”

Photo at top: Activists gather once a year in the capital, on Parliament Hill to consume cannabis and protest laws regarding it. (© Intoit | Dreamstime.com - 420 Parliament Hill - Marijuana Activists Photo)