RIS-Page 3
7. Identify the harm resulting from the behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter and the likelihood
that the harm will occur in the absence of the rule.
The harm that will result is that licenses are not granted in a timely fashion. Businesses will not able to continue to
operate or begin operating. Business may fail. There is also a risk that licensees will not be evaluated based upon the
same criteria. This will affect consumer safety, if all businesses are not held to the same standards. In the absence of
these rules this harm is likely to occur on a regular basis.
A. What is the rationale for changing the rules instead of leaving them as currently written?
The rationale for changing these rules is to create greater consistency in licensing practices for all marihuana
businesses. This cannot be done with the rules as currently written.
8. Describe how the proposed rules protect the health, safety, and welfare of Michigan citizens while promoting a
regulatory environment in Michigan that is the least burdensome alternative for those required to comply.
The proposed rules help ensure that only eligible individuals obtain licenses to grow, process, test, transport, and sell
marihuana products to residents of the state of Michigan. The proposed rules contain specific criteria to ensure that
individuals who are issued licenses are likely to be compliant with all of the administrative rules regulating marihuana
businesses, including safety testing standards that protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
9. Describe any rules in the affected rule set that are obsolete or unnecessary and can be rescinded.
These rules are replacing R 333.205, R 333.206, R 333.207, R 333.208, R 333.209, R 333.210, R 333.211, R.
333.212, R 333.213, R 333.214, R 333.215, R 333.216, R 333.217, R 333.220, R 333.221 and Adult-Use Marihuana
Establishments Emergency Rules 5-18, and 21-23.
10. Please provide the fiscal impact on the agency (an estimate of the cost of rule imposition or potential savings
for the agency promulgating the rule).
There will be no fiscal impact on the agency. The agency already manages both medical marihuana facilities
licensing and adult-use marihuana licensing.
11. Describe whether or not an agency appropriation has been made or a funding source provided for any
expenditures associated with the proposed rules.
No appropriations have been made to any governmental units because of these rules. No additional expenditures are
anticipated or intended with the proposed rules.
12. Describe how the proposed rules are necessary and suitable to accomplish their purpose, in relationship to the
burden(s) the rules place on individuals. Burdens may include fiscal or administrative burdens, or duplicative
acts.
The rules must ensure the safety, security, and integrity of the operation of marihuana businesses. Any burdens would
be in place as required by the MMFLA, MTA, and MRTMA. The application/licensing process requires
documentation, fingerprinting, etc. That will be at a financial and administrative cost. There are rules required for the
use of a statewide monitoring system which will place a burden on the individual but is statutorily required. These
items are already in place so there will be no increased burden.
A. Despite the identified burden(s), identify how the requirements in the rules are still needed and reasonable
compared to the burdens.
The rules must ensure the safety, security, and integrity of the operation of marihuana facilities. Any burden is
reasonable in the proposed rules as it complies with the statutory requirement for its consideration.
13. Estimate any increase or decrease in revenues to other state or local governmental units (i.e. cities, counties,
school districts) as a result of the rule. Estimate the cost increases or reductions for other state or local
governmental units (i.e. cities, counties, school districts) as a result of the rule. Include the cost of equipment,
supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs in both the initial imposition of the rule and any ongoing
monitoring.
There are no anticipated increases or decreases in revenues or costs to other state or local government units as a result
of the proposed rules. Any local or state change to revenue may occur via the statutory provisions as it concerns how
the funds, fees, or taxes are allocated or expended. The agency is required to set an application fee pursuant to the
MMFLA and MRTMA and has set the fee at $6,000 to offset the background investigations, administration of the
licensing application, etc. The other statutory imposed fee is the annual regulatory assessment/renewal fee set forth in
the MMFLA and MRTMA which will be deposited in the marihuana regulatory fund.
14. Discuss any program, service, duty, or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town, village, or school
district by the rules.
MCL 24.245(3)