[House Report 104-386]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                    104-386
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                           SACCHARIN NOTICES

                                _______


December 6, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______


  Mr. Bliley, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1787]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1787) to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
to repeal the saccharin notice requirement, having considered 
the same, report favorably thereon without   amendment and 
recommend that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     1
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearings.........................................................     2
Committee Consideration..........................................     2
Rollcall Votes...................................................     2
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     2
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.....................     3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     3
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     3
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     3
Inflationary Impact Statement....................................     4
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     4
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     4
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     4

                          Purpose and Summary

    The purpose of the bill is to repeal the store warning 
notice requirement established as part of the 1977 Saccharin 
Study and Labeling Act. The bill strikes the subsection 403(p) 
that establishes the store warning notice requirement.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    The store warning notice requirement was part of the 1977 
Saccharin Study and Labeling Act that prevented the Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA) from banning the use of the 
artificial sweetener saccharin in food products. The Act 
required retail stores that sell such products not for 
immediate consumption to post the warning notice pursuant to 
regulations to be promulgated by FDA. The store warning notice 
is in addition to the requirement that the label of such 
products state: ``Use of this product may be hazardous to your 
health. This product contains saccharin which has been 
determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.'' H.R. 1787 
does not change the requirement for the warning label of such 
food products. The redundant store notice warning requirement 
was included as a stop-gap measure to provide the warning prior 
to the time that warning labels would begin to appear on foods 
containing saccharin. Now that warning labels appear on all 
products, this requirement is no longer necessary. Eliminating 
the store warning notice requirement will reduce a burden on 
retail establishments including ``mom and pop'' grocery stores, 
neighborhood supermarkets, pharmacies, and convenience stores.
    On November 2, 1995, the Speaker's Advisory Group on 
Corrections, a bipartisan task force, recommended to the 
Speaker that H.R. 1787 be placed on the House Corrections 
Calendar.

                                Hearings

    The Committee on Commerce has not held hearings on the 
legislation.

                        Committee Consideration

    On November 16, 1995, the Subcommittee on Health and 
Environment met in open markup session and approved H.R. 1787 
for Full Committee consideration, without amendment, by a voice 
vote. On November 29, 1995, the Full Committee met in open 
markup session and ordered H.R. 1787 reported to the House, 
without amendment, by a voice vote.

                             Rollcall Votes

    Clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the House 
requires the Committee to list the recorded votes on the motion 
to report legislation and on amendments thereto. There were no 
recorded votes taken in connection with ordering H.R. 1787 
reported. A motion by Mr. Bliley to order H.R. 1787 reported to 
the House, without amendment, was agreed to by a voice vote.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House, the Committee has not held oversight or legislative 
hearings on this legislation.

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, no oversight findings have been 
submitted to the Committee by the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee states 
that H.R. 1787 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority or tax expenditures or revenues.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, following is the cost estimate 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 
403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                  Washington, DC, December 6, 1995.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed H.R. 1787, a bill to repeal the saccharin notice 
requirement, as ordered reported by the Committee on Commerce 
on November 29, 1995. Pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply 
because the bill would not affect direct spending or receipts.
    H.R. 1787 would repeal section 403(p) of the Food, Drug and 
Cosmetic Act, which requires that information on the possible 
health effects of saccharin use be prominently posted at retail 
establishments selling food products containing the additive. 
The manufacturers of these food products are responsible for 
providing retail establishments with these notices. CBO 
estimates that H.R. 1787 would have no budgetary impact on the 
federal government and a negligible impact on state 
governments. Those states actively enforcing the saccharin 
notification requirement would experience a very modest 
reduction in workload in their food inspection programs.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Anne Hunt 
and Marc Nicole.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.

                     Inflationary Impact Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the bill 
would have no inflationary impact.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act are created by this 
legislation.

             Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation

    Section 1 amends section 403 of the Federal Food Drug and 
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 343) by striking paragraph (p).

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

        SECTION 403 OF THE FEDERAL FOOD, DRUG, AND COSMETIC ACT

                            misbranded food

    Sec. 403. A food shall be deemed to be misbranded--
    (a)  * * *
          * * * * * * *
    [(p)(1) If it contains saccharin and is offered for sale, 
but not for immediate consumption, at a retail establishment, 
unless such retail establishment displays prominently, where 
such food is held for sale, notice (provided by the 
manufacturer of such food pursuant to subparagraph (2)) for 
consumers respecting the information required by paragraph (o) 
to be on food labels and labeling.
    [(2) Each manufacturer of food which contains saccharin and 
which is offered for sale by retail establishments but not for 
immediate consumption shall, in accordance with regulations 
promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to subparagraph (4), take 
such action as may be necessary to provide such retail 
establishments with the notice required by subparagraph (1).
    [(3) The Secretary may by regulation review and revise or 
remove the requirement of subparagraph (1) if he determines 
such action is necessary to reflect the current state of 
knowledge concerning saccharin.
    [(4) The Secretary shall by regulation prescribe the form, 
text, and manner of display of the notice required by 
subparagraph (1) and such other matters as may be required for 
the implementation of the requirements of that subparagraph and 
subparagraph (2). Regulations of the Secretary under this 
subparagraph shall be promulgated after an oral hearing but 
without regard to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
and chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code. In any action 
brought for judicial review of any such regulation, the 
reviewing court may not postpone the effective date of such 
regulation.]
          * * * * * * *