BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1138
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1138 (Padilla)
As Amended August 18, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :36-0
AGRICULTURE 7-0 APPROPRIATIONS 12-2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Eggman, Olsen, Dahle, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Pan, Quirk, Salas, Yamada | |Bradford, |
| | | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| | | |Eggman, Gomez, Holden, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | |Nays:|Bigelow, Jones |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the label of fish or shellfish that is
offered for sale at wholesale or retail to clearly identify the
species of fish or shellfish by its common name. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Requires any label of fresh, frozen, or processed fish or
shellfish, wild or farm-raised, offered for sale at wholesale
or retail to clearly identify the following:
a) Species of fish or shellfish by its common name, as
specified;
b) Whether the fish or shellfish was wild caught or farm
raised; and,
c) Whether the fish or shellfish was caught domestically or
imported.
2)Defines the common name, for purposes of this bill, if the
common name is not defined by the California Department of
Public Health by regulation, as the common name for any
seafood species identified in the Seafood List issued by the
federal Food and Drug Administration.
SB 1138
Page 2
3)Defines processed, for purposes of this bill, as cooking,
baking, heating, drying, mixing, grinding, churning,
separating, extracting, cutting, fermenting, eviscerating,
preserving, dehydrating, freezing, or otherwise manufacturing,
and includes packaging, canning, jarring, or otherwise
enclosing food in a container.
4)States it is unlawful and that it constitutes misbranding for
any person to knowingly sell or offer for sale any fish or
shellfish that is labeled in violation, as specified.
5)Provides that a retail food facility or restaurant that acts
in reasonable reliance on package labeling or product invoice
for labeling fish or shellfish to satisfy the labeling
requirements shall not be held in violation of the labeling
requirements.
6)Requires any retail food facility or restaurant that offers or
sells fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish, wild or
farm-raised, shall clearly identify, at point of sale, the
species of fish or shellfish by its common name, as specified.
7)Provides that if any retail food facility that offers or sells
fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish, wild or
farm-raised, and choses to list country of origin, or whether
the fish is wild caught or farm raises, it must not be
knowingly mislabeled.
a) States that retail food facilities are not required to
label country of origin, or whether the fish is wild caught
or farm raised.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)One-time General Fund costs to the Department of Public Health
(DPH) of up to $150,000 to promulgate and amend regulations to
implement the provisions of the bill. One-time General Fund
costs to DPH of approximately $170,000 to purchase laboratory
equipment needed to test fish and shellfish samples for
accurate labeling.
2)Ongoing General Fund enforcement costs to DPH of approximately
SB 1138
Page 3
$600,000 per year based on 650 spot inspections of retailers
to verify compliance, further investigation and DNA testing of
100 samples resulting from issues raised in the inspections,
and responses to 50 consumer complaints per year.
COMMENTS : In 2013, Oceana released a two year study on fish
sold for retail in San Francisco, Monterey, and Los Angeles.
The study found that 90% of sushi samples were mislabeled in Los
Angeles County, 38% of all fish were mislabeled in Northern
California, and with 52% of sea food tested being mislabeled,
southern California leads the nation in mislabeled fish.
Mislabeling defrauds consumers, restaurants, and fishermen when
a more expensive fish is ordered and then is substituted with a
less expensive, less desirable fish. Restaurants are victims of
fraud when fish distributors sell falsely labeled fish. Fraud
is unfair to fishermen who fish responsibly and lose profits
when fish caught unsustainably are sold in their place.
Furthermore, according to the author, mislabeling fish can lead
to the consumption of seafood that is unhealthy and dangerous;
specific fish can have unhealthy levels of mercury.
Additionally, shellfish can be illegally harvested from areas
that have been deemed too polluted for commercial fishing.
Eating mislabeled fish can lead to potential health risks,
especially to vulnerable populations, such as children and
pregnant women.
Under current federal and state law, it is already illegal to
mislabel fish or shellfish. However, recent studies show
seafood mislabeling is not strongly enforced. This bill
proposes to address this issue by enacting an explicit
requirement that seafood products be accurately labeled with the
common name of the fish, rather than rely on the more general
existing law requirement that labels not be false or misleading.
This bill does add protection for entities that unknowingly
sells mislabeled fish, if the entities have documentation to
show the product was mislabeled when purchased.
Analysis Prepared by : Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916)
319-2084
SB 1138
Page 4
FN: 0004824