21 U.S.C. § 376 — Examination of sea food on request of packer; marking food with results; fees; penalties

submitted 88 years ago by ch. 675 to r/title-21-FOOD-AND-DRUGS · 271 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

The Secretary can set up voluntary sea food inspections for packers who apply. Compliant food gets marked to show it passed, and packers pay fees to fund the program. Faking or misusing an inspection mark is a misdemeanor with fines or up to a year in prison.

This law lets the Secretary set up a voluntary inspection program for sea food. A packer who plans to ship or sell sea food can apply for inspection. The Secretary may then assign inspectors to examine the food and how it is produced, packed, and labeled. If the food and its handling meet the requirements of this chapter, the packer must mark the food to show that compliance. This marking is only allowed, or required, after a passing inspection. The packer must pay for this service. Fees are set by regulation, at whatever amount is needed to fund an adequate inspection program. These fees go into the U.S. Treasury. The Secretary can then use that money to run the program, including paying for extra inspectors when Congress hasn't funded enough of them. The Secretary can also issue regulations covering the sanitary and other conditions the inspection service must meet. Finally, this law creates a crime. It is a misdemeanor to forge, counterfeit, fake, or falsely use any mark, stamp, tag, or label created under this section. It is also a misdemeanor to use one without proper authority. A person convicted of this misdemeanor can be imprisoned for up to one year. They can also be fined between $1,000 and $5,000. A court can impose both the prison term and the fine together.

facts

- Codified at 21 U.S.C. § 376, titled "Examination of sea food on request of packer; marking food with results; fees; penalties." - Originally enacted June 25, 1938 (ch. 675, § 706), with roots tracing back to the Act of June 30, 1906, ch. 3915, § 10A, as added June 22, 1934. - The provision has been amended four times, with renumbering occurring in 1943, 1992, and 1993. - The statute's text comprises 271 words, addressing inspection procedures, fee structures, and misdemeanor penalties for misuse of identification marks. - Source credit reflects multiple public laws, including Pub. L. 102-300, Pub. L. 102-571, and Pub. L. 103-80, indicating a complex legislative history.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

The Secretary, upon application of any packer of any sea food for shipment or sale within the jurisdiction of this chapter, may, at his discretion, designate inspectors to examine and inspect such food and the production, packing, and labeling thereof. If on such examination and inspection compliance is found with the provisions of this chapter and regulations promulgated thereunder, the applicant shall be authorized or required to mark the food as provided by regulation to show such compliance. Services under this section shall be rendered only upon payment by the applicant of fees fixed by regulation in such amounts as may be necessary to provide, equip, and maintain an adequate and efficient inspection service. Receipts from such fees shall be covered into the Treasury and shall be available to the Secretary for expenditures incurred in carrying out the purposes of this section, including expenditures for salaries of additional inspectors when necessary to supplement the number of inspectors for whose salaries Congress has appropriated. The Secretary is authorized to promulgate regulations governing the sanitary and other conditions under which the service herein provided shall be granted and maintained, and for otherwise carrying out the purposes of this section. Any person who forges, counterfeits, simulates, or falsely represents, or without proper authority uses any mark, stamp, tag, label, or other identification devices authorized or required by the provisions of this section or regulations thereunder, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall on conviction thereof be subject to imprisonment for not more than one year or a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000, or both such imprisonment and fine.

Source credit: (June 25, 1938, ch. 675, § 706, formerly § 702A, formerly June 30, 1906, ch. 3915, § 10A, as added June 22, 1934, ch. 712, 48 Stat. 1204; amended Aug. 27, 1935, ch. 739, 49 Stat. 871; June 25, 1938, ch. 675, § 1002(a), formerly § 902(a), 52 Stat. 1059, renumbered § 1002(a), Pub. L. 111–31, div. A, title I, § 101(b)(2), June 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 1784; renumbered § 702A of act June 25, 1938, July 12, 1943, ch. 221, title II, 57 Stat. 500; Pub. L. 102–300, § 6(b)(2), June 16, 1992, 106 Stat. 240; renumbered § 706, Pub. L. 102–571, title I, § 106(3), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4498; Pub. L. 103–80, § 3(dd)(2), Aug. 13, 1993, 107 Stat. 779.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit

1938Enacted · Act of June 25, 1938, ch. 675 · 48 Stat. 1204
1935Amended · Act of Aug. 27, 1935, ch. 739 · 49 Stat. 871
1938Amended · Pub. L. 111-31 · 52 Stat. 1059
1938Amended · Act of June 25, 1938, ch. 221 · 57 Stat. 500
1992Amended · Pub. L. 102-300 · 106 Stat. 240
1992Amended · Pub. L. 102-571 · 106 Stat. 4498
1993Amended · Pub. L. 103-80 · 107 Stat. 779

The record shows a layered legislative history. The provision traces to section 10A of the Food and Drugs Act of June 30, 1906 (ch. 3915), as added in 1934 (ch. 712, 48 Stat. 1204), and amended in 1935. It was carried forward into the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of June 25, 1938 (ch. 675), initially as section 902(a)/706, and has since been renumbered and amended multiple times—by acts in 1943, 1992 (twice, including Pub. L. 102-571), and 1993 (Pub. L. 103-80)—reflecting recurring technical and organizational revisions rather than a single substantive overhaul. The source credit establishes this chain of enactment and renumbering but does not itself explain the purpose of the provision. Historical context: The section is part of the federal food-and-drug regulatory framework that began with the 1906 Act and was substantially reorganized by the 1938 Act. The 1906 Act is generally understood to have responded to public concern over unsafe and adulterated food products, including seafood, and to have established a federal inspection regime. The specific mechanism here—voluntary, fee-based inspection of seafood packers, with marking to show compliance and penalties for misuse of official marks—appears consistent with that broader regulatory purpose of ensuring food safety and enabling consumer reliance on official compliance marks. However, the record does not establish the specific legislative rationale Congress had for enacting this particular voluntary inspection and marking scheme in 1934, and no more specific intent should be inferred beyond this general historical understanding.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

no arguments yet — make the first case