Turns OLCC only wants to know so much about your process…
There is an undocumented 1000 character limit on the required “processing steps” description.
At this point I’m tempted to simply give them
It puts the cannabis in the tube, and then it walks away again … See Luna SOP
Either they want to know how we do things, or they don’t…based on how long it took to give us anywhere to describe our processes, I’m leaning towards the latter.
Bahahaha character limits. No file upload options?
No file uploads.
Downloads omit the “attributes” (Eg: “intended for customers pie hole”)
ChatGpt: waste 1000 characters of space typing an introduction to our process knowing it has a 1000 character limit and they’ll never see anything.
I prefer: Write me an SOP for extraction in the Luna, and include a summary of less than 1000 characters for the regulators.
Not trying to obsfucate.
Happy to leave the gory details in a 3-ring binder they’ll never look at, but I’d like them to get the gist of the operation.
Dear [Supervisor/Regulatory Authority],
I am writing to provide a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for cannabis extraction using Luna’s automated Extraction System at our OLCC Processing facility. Our goal is to produce high-quality cannabis extracts with maximum efficiency and safety while complying with all OLCC regulations.
Our SOP includes the following steps:
Preparing the input material: We ensure that the cannabis flowers or trim are clean, dry, and free of contaminants before loading them into the Extraction System.
Loading the Extraction System: We load the input material into the extraction vessel, ensuring that it is evenly distributed and that the vessel is not overfilled.
Adding the extraction solvent: We add the appropriate amount of solvent (usually ethanol or hydrocarbon) to the extraction vessel using the automated dosing system.
Extracting: We initiate the extraction process using the automated Extraction System, which controls temperature, pressure, and other parameters to optimize extraction efficiency and quality.
Collecting the extract: We collect the extracted solution in a collection vessel, where it is further processed and purified.
Reclaiming the solvent: We reclaim the solvent using Luna’s automated solvent recovery system, ensuring that it is safely and efficiently recycled for future use.
Post-processing: We post-process the extract according to our specific requirements, such as winterization, distillation, or chromatography, to produce the desired end product.
We adhere to all OLCC regulations throughout the extraction process, including proper record-keeping, employee training, and safety measures.
By following this SOP and using Luna’s automated Extraction System, we can produce high-quality cannabis extracts efficiently and safely while complying with all OLCC regulations.
Thank you for your attention and support in ensuring compliance and safety in our cannabis extraction operations.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
Summary for regulators:
This Standard Operating Procedure outlines the steps for cannabis extraction using Luna’s automated Extraction System at our OLCC Processing facility. We prepare the input material, load it into the Extraction System, add the extraction solvent, extract, collect the extract, reclaim the solvent, and post-process the extract. We adhere to all OLCC regulations and use Luna’s system to ensure efficient and safe extraction while producing high-quality extracts
@cyclopath howd I do?
Here’s what I fed it: “Write me an SOP for extraction in the Luna, and include a summary of less than 1000 characters for the regulators. We are an OLCC Processing facility. This is a Standard Operating Procedure for Cannabis Extraction using Lunas automated Extraction system. https://www.lunatechequipment.com/ for reference”
I’d like a smidge more emphasis on “it’s automagic”…
But yeah, something along those lines. I figured I’d feed it my current “summaries” and go from there.
The better detail you give it the better it’s output usually. Have fun with that.
Yeah they just want you to reference your internal SOP - not your actual process steps. 
You know, keep that IP close. Is it secret? Is it safe?
I’d rather they actually learned something…
I get that’s just my faulty wiring.
Eg: Decarb.
NOTES: Decarboxylation is the process of turning THCa into THC. We decarboxylate both BHO, and THCa isolate. Both are expected to lose mass due to the CO2 evolved. THCA isolate should loose ~12%, BHO should loose about 9-10% of starting mass as CO2. See: Decarboxylation SOP 1.0 and Waste Documentation SOP 1.0.
Things are of course NOT working as they should, my current favorite is that one has to “select” packages to get them into a job.
Typing the last 4, or scanning a barcode DON’T work…
That’s the same UID, first one is typed, second scanned, third “selected” after using the search function. It simply does not acknowledge the first two!!
Which says to me the subroutine to perform the (normal) lookup had not been added to the code generating this dialog. Or it’s pointing somewhere else (field name is wrong). That should not have made it to the sandbox, let alone out of it.
There are a couple of other doozies we’ve run across, and a bunch of stupid little things that make data entry harder than it should be.
Go to ADD three packages to a job that already has 14 packages in it. It was deliberate. I was curious.
Dialog pops up with weights, but no tag numbers!! Insists I add them. Won’t let me scan them. Fuck that noise I’m not searching for each of those again. I’ll just discontinue the job, and select them from the grid by eye again.
Might as well fuck around and see what’s up with these UID-less lines.
it’s not showing package numbers, what happens if I remove those lines?
Lets me remove 13 of them. Total weight of job doesn’t change. ( however, weights return to parent packages). Add my three packages, remove the one I could not remove (to leave zero), and hit “adjust”.
Now job as total weight of the three added packages. Not unreasonable, in fact expected, but because I have adjusted it, I can no longer discontinue it.
Understand, there are only three excuses you can adjust a job with:
So if I discontinue the job, why can’t I have my weed back?
If I pull “product” (package anything), then clearly I can’t have ALL my weed back, but why can’t I discontinue?
Let’s say I got 100kg of weed set up to extract, find another 20kg, added it to the job, only to discover that we have no butane. So this is all going into ethanol?
I can pull the biomass out of the job in a package (or six) and send that to an EtOH-job, but there is no valid reason that I shouldn’t just be able to discontinue the job.
Really seems like this update was taken live without adequate testing, again…
Based on when the sandbox went live, I would tend to blame METRC for not getting the job finished on time, and OLCC for deciding to run with it anyway.
Not surprised. Just disappointed…and venting here so I’m less likely to try and rip someones head off over the phone in the morning
how has that pappy van winkle scandal effected the cannabis side of things?
Selling knock-offs?
Like sprayed flower?
Or d8 as HHC?
Nah…
We’ll see how it all plays out eventually. 
Processing jobs in metric went live last friday 2/9/24 in Nevada. Im not to happy about all the extra computer work. Another problem with it is when you go from crude to distillate it requires you to tag the crude before it goes into the “distill” job. now that the crude has a Tag it must be tested before it can be distilled… now they turned an already slow process into a even slower process that requires extra tags and extra labs…smh
How does it require you to test before distilling? Every time you take something from a job it needs a tag, even if its going right into another job. Which still boggle my mind that things in jobs dont need tags or a location.
Not how OR is set up. Doubt it’s how NV is.
That would lead to testing product multiple times. If you guys let that slip by then you weren’t paying attention when the rules were being discussed…
Testing is required before SALE, and even then only sale to RETAIL outlets (least here in OR)
I certainly see no mention of “it must be tested to ENTER a processing job” here https://www.metrc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/NV_IB_0079_Processing-Jobs-New-Date.pdf
I suspect whomever told you you need to test that crude before distillation was just plain wrong.
Maybe ask your state more questions
That is what i thought!! Our on staff attorney is the one who is claiming this and i beilive he is wrong. im going to do some more digging and asking. Thank you
given the price of testing, you might suggest docking their pay to make up for their incompetence.
if they truly believe this is the case, I would argue that they should have noticed before the rules were enforced (that’s their fucking job!) and either asked for clarification from the state or made a huge noise about the nonsensical nature of testing products multiple times.
how much as said attorney cost you in testing so far?
So according to CCB crude destined for distillate must be tested prior to distilling but yet “crude” used to make concentrates dont have to be tested…as of yet. mind you this is for nevada.
I asked for the reg that states that and the one they sent says “crude extracted resin” must be tested. I tried to argue that “crude extracted resin” would be the distillate and not the crude. waiting on a rersponse now. they also hinted that the distillate would also have to be tested prior to mixing with terps, once mixed with terps it would then be tested again because its a “new product”. i used to be able to bypass all the extra testing by doing the paperwork straight from flower to cart. now with the new JIP thats almost impossible to due…until i find a work around
