WHO DROP THE BALL ? The PODS info
Quote:
During the inspection the applicant indicated that the company intends to use enclosed growing pods. The pods Will be constructed from glass and will have a dedicated employee/operator responsible for all of the growing/harvesting activities within the pot. The pod concept allows for
segregation of crops to ensure minimal contamination and/or plant manipulation.
The company constructed a scaled-down prototype of the growing pod for the inspection The prototype was constructed primarily of glass; however there was an area where non-transparent material was used which would cause a blindspot during visual monitoring. The company was advised that an RPIC or A/RPIC must supervise and be physically present in any area. that activities related to medical marijuana are taking place. Also, the prototype growing pod did not have in/out access card readers; this would be required as per the Regulations regarding areas where cannabis is present. In addition to this, there were no cameras present in the prototype, based on the applicant’s proposed growing model they would need to demonstrate that adequate visual monitoring of the
activity in each growing pod could be achieved. Based on the information provided during the inspection, the scaled-up version of the growing pods would house up to 10000 plants per pod. As the applicant did not have the growing pods they intend to use for production purposes in place it was not possible for the inspection team to accurate access whether the scaled up version of the growing pods would meet the division 3 security requirements
The room that will be housing the growing pods did appear to meet the MMPR requirements, however once the room is modi?ed to include the growing pods it would need to be reassessed.
Quote:
Based on the information provided during the inspection, the applicant will be ready and able to meet the requirements of the MMPR provided that the de?ciencies noted during the inspection debrief
meeting are addressed. A re—inspection may be required to assess the security measures for the fullscale growing pods once construction is complete. (See comments, section H)
Quote:
During the inspection the applicant indicated that the company intends to use enclosed growing pods. The pods Will be constructed from glass and will have a dedicated employee/operator responsible for all of the growing/harvesting activities within the pot. The pod concept allows for
segregation of crops to ensure minimal contamination and/or plant manipulation.
The company constructed a scaled-down prototype of the growing pod for the inspection The prototype was constructed primarily of glass; however there was an area where non-transparent material was used which would cause a blindspot during visual monitoring. The company was advised that an RPIC or A/RPIC must supervise and be physically present in any area. that activities related to medical marijuana are taking place. Also, the prototype growing pod did not have in/out access card readers; this would be required as per the Regulations regarding areas where cannabis is present. In addition to this, there were no cameras present in the prototype, based on the applicant’s proposed growing model they would need to demonstrate that adequate visual monitoring of the
activity in each growing pod could be achieved. Based on the information provided during the inspection, the scaled-up version of the growing pods would house up to 10000 plants per pod. As the applicant did not have the growing pods they intend to use for production purposes in place it was not possible for the inspection team to accurate access whether the scaled up version of the growing pods would meet the division 3 security requirements
The room that will be housing the growing pods did appear to meet the MMPR requirements, however once the room is modi?ed to include the growing pods it would need to be reassessed.
Quote:
Based on the information provided during the inspection, the applicant will be ready and able to meet the requirements of the MMPR provided that the de?ciencies noted during the inspection debrief
meeting are addressed. A re—inspection may be required to assess the security measures for the fullscale growing pods once construction is complete. (See comments, section H)
