Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$27.00



View/Hide Left Panel

APPENDIX G Areas of Discrepancy Between Federal and State Food Labeling Requirements Identified by States and Consumer and Industry Groups

State

State Response

Consumer Response

Industry Response

Alabama

N.P.

N.D.I.

Dairy; honey; oysters

Alaska

N.P.

N.D.I.

Fish

Arizona

N.P.

Arizona Consumers Council stated that discrepancies exist between FDCA Sections 403(f), (h), (k) and Arizona law; and requested that FDA adopt Arizona statute (Section 36-906) related to labeling of vegetable fats.

Dairy

Arkansas

N.P.

N.D.I.

Dairy; produce; honey; fish

California

N.P.; however, different bottled water standards. [Personal communication with J. Scheneman, CDHS, who stated that misbranded olive oil is no longer a problem and that the statutory provision is not enforced.]

Bottled water, ice; olive oil; slack fill

Dairy; honey; olive oil

Colorado

N.P.

N.D.I.

Dairy; honey; labeling of bulk food ingredients [FDCA Section 403(k)]

Connecticut

Bottled water; sulfites; apple juice/cider; container fill

Daily; sulfites; honey

Dairy; honey

Delaware

N.P.

N.D.I.

Dairy; apples (qual./grade); imitation

Florida

Discrepancies between FDCA Sections 403(b), (d), (h), (i) and Florida requirements

Dairy; bottled water; pecans

Dairy; citrus (grade); honey

Georgia

Vidalia onion; also discrepancies between FDCA Sections 403(b), (f), (i)

N.D.I.

Dairy; honey (imitation); Vidalia onion



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement