BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 465
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 465 (Correa)
As Amended August 19, 2013
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :37-0
AGRICULTURE 7-0 BUSINESS & PROFESSION
13-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Eggman, Olsen, Atkins, |Ayes:|Bonilla, Jones, |
| |Dahle, Pan, Quirk, Yamada | |Bocanegra, Campos, |
| | | |Dickinson, Eggman, |
| | | |Gordon, Hagman, Holden, |
| | | |Maienschein, Mullin, |
| | | |Ting, Wilk |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Revises the definition for "nonfunctional slack fill"
prohibited in packaged goods to require that nonfunctional slack
fill be substantially less than the allowed capacity, and
clarifies a particular exemption to require the actual size of
the product be clearly and conspicuously depicted on any side of
the exterior packaging, except the bottom. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Amends the definition of "nonfunctional slack fill" as it
relates to: packaged commodities under the Fair Packaging and
Labeling Act (FPLA), food containers under the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act) and containers under the
Sherman Food, Drug and Cosmetic Law (Sherman Law), to specify
that the nonfunctional slack fill in the empty space must be
substantially less than its capacity for reasons other than
any one or more of 15 existing exemptions, as specified.
2)Specifies that slack fill in a package is not by itself a
violation of FPLA and the Sherman Law, unless it is
nonfunctional slack fill.
3)Specifies that, for purposes of an existing exemption for
nonfunctional slack fill under FPLA and the Sherman Law, the
dimensions of the product or immediate product container must
SB 465
Page 2
be visible through the exterior packaging or where the actual
size of the product or immediate product container is clearly
and conspicuously depicted on any side of the exterior
packaging, excluding the bottom.
4)Makes other technical and clarifying amendments.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes certain packaging requirements for containers used
for distribution or sale of commodities under FPLA, the FDC
Act and the Sherman Law including:
a) Prohibiting a container in which commodities are packed
to have a false bottom, false sidewalls, false lid or
covering, or to be constructed or filled as to facilitate
the perpetration of deception or fraud;
b) Prohibiting a container from being made, formed, or
filled as to be misleading, and declares that a container
that does not allow a consumer to fully view its contents
violates this provision if it contains nonfunctional slack
fill; and,
c) Defining "nonfunctional slack fill" as the empty space
in a package that is filled to less than its capacity for
reasons other than the specified exemptions.
2)Defines "slack fill" as the difference between the actual
capacity of a container and the volume of product contained
therein.
3)Authorizes any sealer to seize a container in violation of
these provisions of law, and provides that by order of the
Superior Court the containers seized shall be condemned and
destroyed or released upon conditions imposed by the court
against their use in violation of the law.
FISCAL EFFECT : None. This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS : This bill is intended to provide manufacturers and
retailers with greater clarity and certainty regarding the
various requirements for product and food packaging -
SB 465
Page 3
specifically, the prohibited empty space in packages known as
"slack fill" and the multiple exemptions to that prohibition
referred to as "safe harbors." Supporters claim that this lack
of clarity has led to unnecessary packaging redesigns and
nuisance litigation.
According to the author, 15 years after the slack fill
exemptions became law, companies face renewed and inconsistent
enforcement actions in California for their product packaging,
even though such packaging meets one of the law's exemptions.
The author states the purported reason for the current
enforcement efforts is that, despite meeting an exemption, the
packaging is nonetheless misleading and thus violates the
statute. Supporters state that this is a clear misreading of
the statute, and ignores the purpose of the exemptions placed
into law by the California Legislature. Slack fill violations
can result in monetary penalties and can cause manufacturers to
spend millions modifying packaging for products sold in
California. Supporters state that this bill fixes this
inequitable situation by clarifying the application of the slack
fill exemptions already codified in law.
Opposition argues that the bill would seriously weaken existing
law that prohibits the use of unnecessarily large containers to
mislead consumers into believing that they are receiving more
product than is actually the case. The opponents contend the
bill would entirely eliminate the first two methods of violating
current slack fill law and would add an additional burden in
establishing the existence of nonfunctional slack fill.
Analysis Prepared by : Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916)
319-2084
FN: 0001791