BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1414
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1414 (Agriculture Committee)
As Amended March 10, 2014
2/3 vote. Urgency
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 24, 2013) |SENATE: |31-0 |(March 13, |
| | | | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
Original Committee Reference: A. & A.R.
SUMMARY : Creates a new definition for "pasteurized in-shell
eggs" and includes these eggs in the definition of an "egg
handler;" exempts pasteurized in-shell eggs from current
labeling requirements for "shell eggs" and instead creates new
labeling requirements and sell-by date criteria for pasteurized
in-shell eggs. Contains an urgency clause, allowing this bill
to take effect immediately upon enactment.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill,
and instead:
1)Define "pasteurized in-shell eggs" to mean in-shell eggs that
have been pasteurized by a method approved by the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA), the California Department of Food
and Agriculture (CDFA) or the California Department of Public
Health (CDPH).
2)Add pasteurized in-shell eggs to the definition of an egg
handler.
3)Exclude pasteurized in-shell eggs from the definition and
labeling requirements for "shelled eggs."
4)Create new labeling requirements for pasteurized in-shell eggs
that allows for a sell-by date not to exceed 75 days from the
date of pasteurization, requires identification of the eggs as
pasteurized, and requires processors of such eggs to complete
an appropriate shelf-stability study that includes public
health and safety criteria which shall be made available to
CDFA or CDPH upon request.
5)Specify that a food is misbranded if its labeling does not
AB 1414
Page 2
conform to the requirements for pasteurized in-shell egg
labeling as defined in this bill.
6)Exclude labeling requirements for pasteurized in-shell eggs
that are packaged for interstate commerce to a state or
federal agency that requires a different format for the
sell-by or best-if-used-by date, and the egg processor
utilizes that format.
7)Require CDFA, in consultation with the Shell Egg Advisory
Committee, to establish a plant identification numbering
system and assign identification numbers to all pasteurized
in-shell egg handling facilities.
EXISTING LAW does not identify a difference between shell eggs
and pasteurized in-shell eggs and specified labeling
requirements, specifically a 30 day sell-by date from packaging.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : Current processors of pasteurized in-shell eggs are
not selling them in California due to the 30 day sell-by date
requirement for shelled eggs. By pasteurizing the egg in-shell
it provides a safer, longer shelf life product, and due to the
added expense of the processing, there needs to be a greater
time frame for retail sale and the ability for commercial users
to be able to store and use the eggs.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) allows for the use of an identification
symbol to officially identify products produced from U.S. Grade
AA or Grade A shell eggs that are processed into pasteurized
in-shell eggs. Additionally, the USDA "Certified Pasteurized"
symbol may be used to identify pasteurized eggs that have been
processed in accordance with USDA's established pasteurization
processing requirements.
This bill extends the sell-by date for pasteurized in-shell eggs
from 30 days to no greater than 75 days. Processors will be
required to provide a shelf-stability study verifying that the
extended sell-by date meets public health and safety standards.
Although not currently required by law, shelf-stability studies
are used by food manufacturers to best determine sell-by dates
to avoid deterioration and decomposition of their products in
the marketplace. Any decomposed food would be considered
AB 1414
Page 3
adulterated under existing state and federal law, and the sale
of such food constitutes a violation.
This bill was substantially amended in the Senate and the
Assembly-approved version of this bill deleted. This bill, as
amended in the Senate, is inconsistent with Assembly actions and
the provisions of this bill, as amended in the Senate, have not
been heard in an Assembly policy committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Jim Collin / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084
FN: 0003060