Sure. Page 9, 10, and 11 talk about the process for creating packages from Processing Jobs. This is necessary to get material back out of the processing job. Material in the processing job is locked down, you cannot use it anywhere else until you pull it back out either as a package or as waste.
Here’s the section that says you have to get everything out using packages OR waste. 
Does that imply to you that “vanished into the atmosphere” will suffice for decarb?
we puts 10kg in
We gots 8.7kg out
Transfer losses account for 67g
My bet is METRC will barf unless I somehow “adjust” for that mass (as they should)…I will be truly amazed if I can specify it as other than “waste” or “moisture”.
Despite being told otherwise by OLCC yesterday…
I hoping they show some comprehension of “solvent loss”, as they explicitly ask “is solvent in this step?!?”
…and they’re trying to get a sandbox up before this goes live?!?
Maybes we can “package” the CO2?
Sell it as “cannabis derived” to the folks claiming CO2 extraction is solventless…”no non-cannabis derived solvents”.
You don’t package the CO2. But the weight is gone and its not in a package which makes it waste. And CO2 is a waste product of the processing step. There is a process for this, and its covered in the guide (how to handle wastes). This could be biomass waste, solvent waste, residue waste (that you are then handling as waste with your waste SOP), Co2 waste, etc.
Its in your PROCESS JOB, which you are defining. There are plenty of ways to define it, including a very elaborate (other) if you wanted. And you just drop in your SOP number and call it good for those process steps for those that are worried about IP being stolen by METRC or something like that…
There’s no reason METRC should barf for this - that’s what this new processing tool is supposed to be about. Increasing/decreasing weights from process steps.
If we don’t assume that everyone else are idiots… then we can use the tool they have given us to do these things. They don’t need to be rocket scientists, and hell we don’t want them to be. The more they know, they more they will regulate. The more they will regulate, the harder it will be to maintain the status quo - AKA them not knowing enough to come in and tell you that you can’t do something because reasons.
I have my next METRC work group in about 2 weeks. I’ll ask some clarifying questions, but really other than the system requiring a fuckton of additional tags, without really having any additional tools that streamline my work, seems like it covers all the important database bases… And its flexible (similar to adding plants and items…) which is also nice.
Wow, I didn’t realize that they wanted you to assign a package for an unfinished product. That’s where the disconnect for me was. I figured they referred to package as an end product.
What do tags cost for processors these days? Or did Oregon opt out of tag fees?
How much do the tags cost? Plant tags are . 45 cents each and package tags are . 25 cents each .
That’s from METRCs website for Oregon.
You don’t. It might be a business opportunity….
Or in someone’s pocket…possibly the terpene market: Could terpenes be a waste product?
OLCC claimed this was their push, but would seem false if you’re hearing about it in CO & MI wouldn’t it?
That will probably help assuage our metrc specialist’s sense of impending doom 
…but will require chatgpt clean up a couple or three more SOP. which is a good thing.
I appreciate the input. Again, I think this is long overdue. I also think lots of folks are gonna get it wrong out the gate…
See: Metrc
Using words we have well established meanings for in novel ways…as if they didn’t come chat?
@Cassin is correct. They did and do.
Not necessarily particularly good listeners, and/or audience participation was lackluster.
I wasn’t there, so if I think they got it wrong it’s no point whining here about it (I’m not.). Hoping to get our metrc guru on the local user group so we’re more prepared next time. The ~200mile round trip doesn’t work well for me these days.
It’s not franwell’s (METRC) job to make this easy. It’s their job to track the cannabis. In a manner consistent with each states legal framework.
I know the group I’m with will have little problem with it…once we have access to it.
It looks like more work, from the outside, but given how we currently do our documentation, I’m not certain it will even add a tag to our work flow.
Just (finally) an acknowledgment that this is not an instantaneous “repackage” that is about to go down.
For reals, we have monthly meetings about this stuff in Michigan with the CRA and the METRC work group team. I’ve been on that for years. There is a lot of discussion about things like this, although I haven’t got to see any prototypes until now. Requests for better processing batch management have been made for years. And now in Michigan the regulator are using the backend API reporting tools to look at things like “physically possible to make that much disty” and using your normal efficiencies and stuff to start investigations.
The METRC data hole gets so much bigger, if only it was a little bit more functional on reporting, I don’t even think I would mind paying for all the RFID tags. Sadly the two places I’m at just now are not interested in the cool RFID tools that let you use that functionality (you know cause cost savings) so now we have the tags, but they don’t help us find anything, cause they don’t want to buy an RFID wand to find them. -shrug-
Franwell didn’t have a method of reading those tags for several years…
Sandbox is up.
If you’re playing metrc processing in OR, you have 8 days to wrap your heads around how this is supposed to go…
Tell us more! Screenies! Share the wealth. I have my next METRC workgroup meeting in 2 weeks and would love to provide some feedback
You have to pay for metrc tags? Damn California got one thing right. We go through about 3000 tags a week in mfg and about 2000 a week in Distro.
only grabbed a couple. might take some more next time I can get in there. Only get an hr at a time. sandbox clears between visits. had they rolled this out in 2016 we’d be in decent shape at this point. it looks reasonable. mostly.
OLCC apparently expects chaos, and I believe they’re correct. because I don’t think they understand what we do. still.
For extractions, the waste weight should be calculated as the difference between the weight of the source cannabis material and the weight of any cannabinoid concentrates or extracts created during the processing job. For example: A processor uses 100 kg of bulk flower in an extraction and distillation process. The process results in 1 kg of terpenes and 15 kg of distillate. They would record the waste as
84 kg of spent biomass (100 kg - 1 kg - 15 kg = 84 kg).https://www.oregon.gov/olcc/marijuana/Documents/CTS/Processing-Job-Guide.pdf
hmmm…so the fats & waxes, heads & tails, and transfer losses simply don’t exist…seems like a great model don’t you think?
simple, just not a good reflection on reality…given that there was probably less than 75kg of spent biomass actually thrown in the bin…
anyone else having trouble with OR METRC’s latest training videos, as embedded on the WIKI (Metrc Oregon Wiki)…turns out they were recorded and posted at reasonable resolution.
However, once they are embedded thusly
they default to unreadable. At least on the varied systems I’ve looked at them on.
turns out its a thing… Force High-Definition (HD) Playback on YouTube Embed?
so rather than calling OLCC idiots, like I did, click on the settings icon, and select a more reasonable resolution, so you can see what they’re trying to tell you.
Or just click the links from the bulletin in metrc instead of the wiki. Those links work just fine, or at least they did earlier this week. They (OLCC) are probably unaware of the issue on the wiki.
right, just like the link that takes you to their training scenarios.
which was wrong in the sandbox, and was fixed to a different “doesn’t work”, and added to the live server this morning.
I guess it’s a minor improvement over where the previous link lead.
Edit: metrc support has told me twice now that the OR sandbox is down. Once while I was using it. Your mileage may vary.
Five days out, and OR’s Metrc specialist admits that the training “scenarios” they’ve been pointing at for days now haven’t actually been created yet…
Thank you for letting us know about the link issue. We do not have a process job scenario created yet. The scenario link was removed until we can get the scenario created.
Not unexpected. Nor without precedent
Still disappointing…
so… the first thing you need to do when you get in your sand box is adjust yourself up some damn weed.
they provision you with only two 20g packages of “buds” and two 20g packages of trim. Supports the hypothesis that “they just don’t understand what we do…”
then split that out into some packages so you haz something to play with… I made 10 at 100kg
then we create some processing jobs. this set almost covers what we do. need a couple more.
not impressed that we can’t push these via CSV…nor that CSV downloads don’t include the attributes.
then make a couple of items. I made “BHO”, “huffables” and “spinables”
now I’m ready to process some weed. 100kg => in
then we pour some pans…we take these weights the next morning and create tags (7 pans) “BHO”
here are those packages.
next they go to the Oven for Incubation
WHOOPS looks like I left a gram of that unpurged BHO in a package ==> the oven. lets make that in inhouse QC.
pulled two pakages from the incubation; “huffables” and “spinnables”. huffables go on to “purge” spinables go to "spun. should have included waste, but was in a hurry…
seems like we’re gonna get through this with fewer tags than we have been…
You’re my favorite pnw member that actually gets down to business. Love watching your solution making / shit talking / begging the question. You make your crew look 2x cooler by being a leader in the present. I literally apply a mental note on your associates/ coworkers that communicate here and try to respect them more because they work with or around you.
Straight fuck you with a little icing on the cake to appear friendly or / here’s how I skin a cat no bullshit.
Its always refreshing watching your discourse.
the above post seemed like the most efficient way to communicate my last sandbox to my team.
I consider this place swap space…
