BILL NUMBER: AB 820 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 26, 2015
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Mark Stone
FEBRUARY 26, 2015
An act relating to public health. An act
to add Section 8379 to the Fish and Game Code, and to add Sections
110796 and 114092 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to fish and
shellfish.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 820, as amended, Mark Stone. Seafood labeling.
Fish and shellfish: labeling and identification.
(1) Existing federal law, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act, regulates, among other things, the labeling of foods introduced
or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce and generally
prohibits the misbranding of food. Existing state law, the Sherman
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, generally regulates misbranded food,
which includes food that is not properly labeled. A violation of
these provisions is a crime.
This bill would provide that it is unlawful and constitutes
misbranding to sell or offer for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed
fish or shellfish intended for human consumption without clearly
identifying at the point of sale whether the fish or shellfish was
wild caught or farm raised. The bill would exempt a person who sells
or offers for sale any fish or shellfish and acts in reasonable
reliance on the fish or shellfish package labeling and product
invoice from being found in violation of those requirements. The bill
would state the intent of the Legislature to increase penalties for
a violation of these requirements, as specified. Because any
violation of these provisions would be a crime, this bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
(2) Existing law, the California Retail Food Code, provides for
the regulation of health and sanitation standards for retail food
facilities, as defined, by the State Department of Public Health.
Under existing law, local health agencies are primarily responsible
for enforcing the California Retail Food Code. A violation of any of
these provisions is punishable as a crime. Existing law requires fish
that are received for sale or service to be commercially and legally
caught or harvested.
This bill would require a retail food facility that sells or
offers for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish
intended for human consumption to identify whether the fish or
shellfish was wild caught or farm raised, and would prohibit a retail
food facility from knowingly misidentifying that the fish or
shellfish was wild caught or farm raised. The bill would exempt a
retail food facility or restaurant that sells or offers for sale any
fish or shellfish and acts in reasonable reliance on the fish or
shellfish package labeling and product invoice from being found in
violation of those requirements. Because any violation of these
provisions would be a crime, and by imposing additional duties on
local health officers, this bill would impose a state-mandated local
program.
(3) Existing law regulates commercial fishing and imposes
regulations on various salt water fish.
This bill would prohibit pacific red snapper or butterfish from
being used as an alternate name for specified fish, including the
sebastes entomelas (widow rockfish) and the anoplopoma fimbria
(sablefish).
(4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no
reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that,
if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains
costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall
be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, regulates
the packaging, labeling, and advertising of food and is administered
by the State Department of Public Health. Existing law provides that
food is misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading.
This bill would state the intent of the legislature to enact
legislation to clarify seafood labeling requirements and to increase
penalties for seafood mislabeling violations.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no
yes . State-mandated local program: no
yes .
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 8379 is added to the
Fish and Game Code , to read:
8379. (a) Pacific red snapper shall not be used as an alternate
name for any of the following fish:
(1) Sebastes entomelas (widow rockfish).
(2) Sebastes flavidus (yellowtail rockfish).
(3) Sebastes goodei (chilipepper).
(4) Sebastes jordani (shorbelly rockfish).
(5) Sebastes levis (cowcod).
(6) Sebastes melanops (black rockfish).
(7) Sebastes miniatus (vermillion rockfish).
(8) Sebastes ovalis (speckled rockfish).
(9) Sebastes paucispinis (bocaccio).
(10) Sebastes pinniger (canary rockfish).
(11) Sebastes ruberrimus (yelloweye rockfish).
(12) Sebastes rufus (bank rockfish).
(13) Sebastes serranoides (olive rockfish).
(b) Butterfish shall not be used as an alternate name for the
anoplopoma fimbria (sablefish).
SEC. 2. Section 110796 is added to the
Health and Safety Code , to read:
110796. (a) It is unlawful and constitutes misbranding for any
restaurant, retailer, wholesaler, distributor, processor, or
packager, to sell or offer for sale any fresh, frozen, or processed
fish or shellfish intended for human consumption without clearly
identifying at the point of sale whether the fish or shellfish was
wild caught or farm raised.
(b) For purposes of this section, "processed" means 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.
(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), any person who sells or
offers for sale any fish or shellfish and acts in reasonable reliance
on the fish or shellfish package labeling and product invoice to
satisfy the requirements described in subdivision (a) shall not be
found in violation of this section. The burden of proving reasonable
reliance is upon the seller. Once a seller proves that he or she
reasonable relied on the fish or shellfish package labeling and
product invoice, the burden of proof shall shift to the previous
supplier in the supply chain until the violator is identified.
(d) It is the intent of the Legislature to provide additional
funding for spot inspections of retailers at the final point of sale
to verify compliance with this section, further investigation, and
DNA testing of samples as a followup to issues identified in the
inspections and in response to consumer complaints.
(e) It is the intent of the Legislature to increase penalties for
a violation of this section based on the fair market value of the
fish involved in the violation.
SEC. 3. Section 114092 is added to the
Health and Safety Code , to read:
114092. (a) A retail food facility that sells or offers for sale
any fresh, frozen, or processed fish or shellfish intended for human
consumption shall identify whether the fish or shellfish was wild
caught or farm raised, and shall not knowingly misidentify whether
the fish or shellfish was wild caught or farm raised.
(b) For purposes of this section, "processed" means 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.
(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a retail food facility or
restaurant that sells or offers for sale any fish or shellfish and
acts in reasonable reliance on the fish or shellfish package labeling
and product invoice to satisfy the requirements described in
subdivision (a) shall not be found in violation of this section. The
burden of proving reasonable reliance is upon the seller. Once a
seller proves that he or she reasonable relied on the fish or
shellfish package labeling and product invoice, the burden of proof
shall shift to the previous supplier in the supply chain until the
violator is identified.
SEC. 4. No reimbursement is required by this act
pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency
or school district because, in that regard, this act creates a new
crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the
penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section
17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime
within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution.
However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this
act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to
local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made
pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of
Title 2 of the Government Code.
SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature
to enact legislation to clarify seafood labeling requirements in
order to facilitate and increase the enforcement of laws to combat
seafood labeling fraud. It is further the intent of the Legislature
to increase penalties for seafood mislabeling violations.