Page 1
Office of the New York State
Attorney General
Barbara D. Underwood
Attorney General
December 2018
FISHY BUSINESS
REPORT
SEAFOOD FRAUD AND MISLABELING
IN NEW YORK STATE SUPERMARKETS
Page 1
Executive Summary
Something shy is going on at supermarket seafood counters. Consumers think they
are buying lemon sole, red snapper, or wild salmon, or any one of dozens of seafood options.
But too often, they get something else entirely. They unknowingly take home a cheaper, less
environmentallysustainable,orlesshealthysh.It’sabait-and-switch,whichcheatsconsumers
andviolatesconsumerprotectionlaws.
Fromlate2017through2018,theNewYorkStateOfceoftheAttorneyGeneral(“OAG”)
undertooktherstmajorgovernmentinvestigationintheU.S.totargetseafoodfraudatretail
supermarket chains. OAG purchased seafood based on availability at 155 locations across 29
supermarketbrands,targetingseafoodfallingintoninedistinctcategories.Anacademiclaboratory
thenidentiedthespeciesusingDNAtesting.
Theresultsweredisturbing.Keyndingsinclude:
• Morethanoneinfour(26.92%)seafoodpurchaseswithanidentiablebarcodewas
mislabeled.
1
About two-thirds of the supermarket brands reviewed had at least one
instanceofsuspectedmislabeling.
• A small subset of supermarket brandswasresponsible for a vastly disproportionate
shareofsuspectedmislabeling.Ofthe12chainswith10ormoresamplestested,ve
had rates of suspectedmislabeling that exceeded 50%. These ve aresubject to an
ongoingOAGconsumerfraudinvestigation.
• Whilemislabelingaffectedvirtuallyeverytestedseafoodcategory,therewasrampant
mislabelingofcertainspecies.Theresultssuggestthatconsumerswhobuylemonsole,
redsnapper,andgrouperaremorelikelytoreceiveanentirelydifferentsh.Similarly,
consumerswhoboughtwhatwasadvertisedas“wild”salmonoftenactuallyreceived
farm-raisedsalmoninstead.Suchconsumershadoftenpaidmoremoney—onaverage
34%more—toavoidfarmraisedsh.
• Thesubstitutesweretypicallycheaper,lessdesirablespeciesthanthedesiredspecies.
Snapperssoldasredsnapper,forexample,tendedtosellforhalfasmuchwhenproperly
labeledasanothertypeofsnapper.Somesubstitutes(e.g.,lanesnapper),hadhigher
mercurylevelsorcamefromlesssustainablesheriesthanthedesiredspecies,raising
consumersafetyandenvironmentalsustainabilityissues.
• Seafood mislabeling occurred across most regions of New York, but was most
widespread downstate. New York City had a staggering mislabeling rate (42.65%),
with similarly high ratesof mislabeling on LongIsland (40.63%) and onlyslightly
lowerinWestchesterandRocklandCounties(32.43%).
1
ThesectionsbelowprovidekeydetailsonthemethodsOAGusedtotestseafoodpurchasesandidentify
mislabeling,andcertainlimitationsassociatedwiththeresults.
Page 2
Solvingtheseafoodfraudproblemrequiresindustry-widereforms,atallstagesofthesupply
chain.Thereportconcludeswithadescriptionofsomeofthebestpracticesalreadyineffectatcertain
supermarkets.
I. Why Do Consumers Choose Seafood?
Everydayinhomes,schools,hospitals,restaurants,andinstitutionsacrossNewYorkState
and around the country, seafood is onthe menu. In 2015, the averageAmerican consumed an
estimated15.5poundsofshandotherseafood.
2
Highinprotein,lowindietaryfat,andrichin
omega-threefattyacids,theFoodandDrugAdministration(“FDA”)recommendsthattheaverage
Americaneat8to12ouncesofavarietyofseafoodeachweek.
3
Tosatisfyconsumerdemand,supermarketsandotherseafoodpurveyorsinNewYorkoffer
consumersadiversearrayofseafoodoptions.Theserunthegamutfromlocallysourcedoysters,
summerounder,andmackerellandedinMontaukandotherLongIslandports,totuna,catsh,
andkingcrabsowninfromotherpartsofthecountryorfromacrosstheglobe.
Butnotallseafoodisequallycoveted.Consumerswillpayapremiumpriceforcertain
species, while deliberately avoiding others. Factors beyond avor and texture play a role in
consumerchoice,andconsumersmayfavorcertainspeciesthattheycouldnoteasilydistinguish
byappearanceortastealone.Thefollowingseafoodcharacteristicsalsomattertoconsumers:
1. Market Reputation.
4
As with other retail purchases, consumers will pay more for
seafood that is in high demand and seen as a premium product. Certain types of
seafoodarehouseholdnames,carryingpositivemarketassociationsandfeaturingmore
frequently in recipes. Consumers seek out these highly prized species and will pay
higherpricesforthemthanforlesserknown,lesssought-aftervarieties.Forexample,
consumersmayselect“redsnapper”overothertypesofsnapperor“kingsalmon”over
othertypesofsalmon.
2
NationalMarineFisheriesServiceOfceofScienceandTechnology,“FisheriesoftheUnitedStates2015,”
(September2016),available at https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/Assets/commercial/fus/fus15/documents/09_
PerCapita2015.pdfat106.
3
Therecommendationdiffersforcertainpopulations.Formoreinformation,pleaseconsult:https://www.fda.gov/
Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm534873.htm.
4
See, e.g., ScienticAmerican,“MarketplaceRedSnapperIsCaseofBaitandSwitch,”available athttps://www.
scienticamerican.com/article/marketplace-red-snapper-i/(notingconsumerpreferenceforredsnapperoverother
snappers).
Page 3
2. Nutritional and Health Differences.
5
Consumers will select particular seafood
speciesoverothersbecauseofdifferencestheyperceiveintheirsafety,nutrition,and
wholesomeness.Forexample,certainconsumerswillavoidseafoodknowntocontain
highlevelsofmethylmercury,lead,orotherheavymetals.Indeed,theFDAadvises
pregnantandnursingwomen,andchildren,tolimitconsumptionofsuchspecies.To
assistconsumersseekingtoreducetheirexposuretomercuryandothercontaminants,
theFDAandadvocacyorganizations,suchastheEnvironmentalDefenseFund(“EDF”),
classifyseafoodtypesbasedontheirheavymetalcontent.Similarly,someconsumers
agreetopayhigherpricesforwild-caughtshtoavoidfarm-raisedvarietiesthatmay
betreatedwithantibiotics,disinfectants,orpesticides.Consumersmayalsoselectwild
speciesduetodifferencesinthelevelsofprotein,fat, minerals,and othernutrients.
Indeed,wildseafoodvarietiesmaybeanentirelydifferentspeciesthanfarmed,asis
oftenthecasewithsalmon.
3. Environmental Sustainability Concerns.
6
Eco-conscious consumers will select
seafoodspeciesbasedontheirenvironmentalsustainability. Certainshspeciesare
overshed,endangered,orknowntoresultfromenvironmentallyharmfulshingor
aquaculture practices. Environmental organizations have developed seafood guides
andrankingstodirectconsumerstothemostsustainableseafoodoptions.TheSeafood
Watchprogram(“SWP”)oftheMontereyBayAquariumpublishesonepopularguide;
theprogramhasdistributedmorethan51millionpocketguidesandsmartphoneapps.
Dependingwhereandhowashspeciesiscaught,theSWPwillidentifyseafoodasthe
“BestChoice”forsustainability,asa“GoodAlternative,”orasaspeciesto“Avoid.”
7
Othergroups,includingtheEDFandtheSanaCenter,putoutsimilareco-ratings.
5
ConsumerReports,“ChoosetheRightFishToLowerMercuryRiskExposure,”available athttps://www.
consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/10/can-eating-the-wrong-sh-put-you-at-higher-risk-for-mercury-exposure/
index.htm.
6
See, e.g.,UniversityofConnecticutFoodMarketingPolicyCenter,“ConsumerPreferencesforEcolabeled
Seafood:ResultsofaConnecticutSurvey,”available at http://www.fmpc.uconn.edu/research/other/
Connecticut%20Final%20Ecolabel%20Report%2012%2020%2004.pdf.
7
See MarketingNews,“WillSeafoodIndustryMarketingWinOverConsumers?”(January2015),available at
https://www.ama.org/publications/MarketingNews/Pages/swimming-upstream.aspx.
Page 4
II. How Did Seafood Mislabeling First Come to Public Attention?
Seafood substitution and mislabeling is not a new phenomenon. Academics, non-
governmentalorganizations,andregulators throughouttheworldhave identiedhighlevelsof
seafoodmislabelingatthewholesaleandretaillevelsworldwide.
Ofparticularnote,beginningin2012,themarineconservationorganizationOceanabegan
conductingaseriesofinvestigationsthroughouttheUnitedStatesandCanada.Thegroupused
DNA barcode technology to test seafood purchased from grocery stores and restaurants in a
geographicarea,comparingthespecies,aslabeled,tothespeciesasconrmedbyDNA.
8
Inthis
way,Oceanaidentiedwidespreadmislabeling.
In2012,forexample,Oceanaanalyzedsamplesfrom81grocerystores,sushibars,and
otherrestaurantsinNewYorkCity.
9
Testingresultsindicatedthatclosetotwooutofeveryve
seafoodsamplesweremisidentied(39%).Thestudyfoundastaggeringrateofsubstitutionat
sushi restaurants (76%), and high rates of substitution at other restaurants (39%) and grocery
stores(29%).Mislabelingaffectedvariousshvarieties,including“white”tuna,redsnapper,other
specicsnapperspecies,wildsalmonspecies,cod,lemonsole,andgrouper.Ahalf-dozenlesser-
knownspeciesweremislabeled“redsnapper,”includingcrimsonsnapper,spottedrosesnapper,
andyellowtailsnapper.
The FDA has likewise used DNA barcoding to uncover seafood mislabeling in the
supply chain. During the 2012-2013 scal year, for example, the FDA investigated the
mislabeling of certain historically misidentied species at the wholesale level.
10
The FDA’s
study identied a mislabeling rate of 15%, primarily affecting grouper and snapper species.
OAGidentiednopreviousstudyfocusingbroadlyonsupermarketchainsinNewYork
State.NorhasprioractionbyU.S.enforcementagenciesandregulatorssurveyedpotentialseafood
fraudattheretaillevel.
8
ThetestingdescribedinthisreportalsoreliedonDNAbarcodetechnology,asdescribedingreaterdetailinsection
VIbelow.
9
See OceanaReports,“WidespreadSeafoodFraudFoundinNewYorkCity,”(December2012),available at https://
oceana.org/reports/widespread-seafood-fraud-found-new-york-city.
10
See U.S.Food&DrugAdministration,“SummaryofFDA’ssamplingeffortsforseafoodspecies
labelinginFY12-13,”available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/
GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/Seafood/UCM419983.pdf.
Page 5
III. What Leads to Mislabeling?
Mislabelinghasa varietyofcauses, includingintentionalfraud,negligence,andsimple
error.
11
Whilescienticidenticationmethods,likeDNAbarcoding,canconrmtheidentityofthe
species,theydonotshedlightonthereasonforasubstitution.
Intentional Fraud. Thewidepricedisparitiesbetweendifferent sh species mean that
substitutingacheaperormoreobscurespeciesforamoreexpensiveorbetterknownone
canallowthesellertosellatahigherprice–ortopricetheshlowerthanacompetitor
sellingtheauthenticproduct.Incasesofmislabeling,thetendencyofthesubstituteshto
beacheaperspeciessuggeststhatintentionalmisconductinthesupplychainmayplaya
role.
Negligence. Sellers at the wholesale or retail level may lack effective protocols for
identifying the sh they are selling,fordifferentiating between distinct species coming
withinasinglebroadercategory(e.g.,fordistinguishing“red”snapperfromothersnapper
species),foradequatelytrainingstaff,forlabelingsignageandpackaging,orforvettingthe
shsourcebeforemarketingseafoodtoconsumers.Withoutreasonableprocedures,some
mislabelingisinevitable.
Mistake/Error.Misidenticationissometimespossiblewherereasonableproceduresare
inplace,especiallywherespecieshaveasimilarappearanceandareindigenoustothesame
waters.Sucherrorscaninitiallyoccuratanypointinthesupplychain,includingonthe
boat,bythedistributor,orattheshcounter(e.g.,packingthewrongsh).
Forboththeconsumerandtheretailer,distinguishingbetweensimilar-appearingspecies
accuratelycanbeespeciallychallengingiftheseafoodissoldinparts(e.g.,llets),ratherthanas
wholesh.Intentionalfraud,negligence,orerrorsearlierinthesupplychain—atthedockorbya
distributor—canresultinmislabelingatthepointofsaletotheultimateconsumer.
11
See, e.g.,OceanaReports,“OceanaStudyRevealsSeafoodFraudNationwide,”(February2013),availableat
https://oceana.org/reports/oceana-study-reveals-seafood-fraud-nationwide;OceanandCoastalLawJournal,“Not
JustFlounderingAround:APost-RegulatoryFrameworktoAddressSeafoodSubstitution,”(May2017)availableat
https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1355&context=oclj.
Page 6
IV. What Are the Legal Duties of Supermarkets and Other Retailers?
Most consumers are not seafood experts. They interact with the global seafood chain
exclusively at its nal step: their neighborhoodseafood counter or restaurant.To a far greater
degreethanformanyotherfoodproducts,consumersdependontherepresentationsretailersmake
abouttheseafoodforsale.Onestudyfoundthatmorethanhalf(55%)ofseafoodbuyersrely
directlyontheirretailer’sexplanationoftheirseafoodpurchases.
12
SupermarketsandotherretailoutletsinNewYorkarelegallyrequiredtomarkettheseafood
theyaresellingaccurately,mostnotablybytheFederalFood,DrugandCosmeticActandtheNew
YorkStateAgricultureandMarketsLaw.
13
Thesaleofmislabeledseafoodmayalsoviolatefederal
andstateconsumerprotectionlaws,whichprohibitfraudulentanddeceptivebusinesspractices
oradvertising.
14
Theselawsholdsellersofseafoodandotherretailproductsstrictlyliableforthe
accuracyoftheirmarketingrepresentations.Ultimately,retailersareresponsibleforestablishing
themeasuresreasonablyneededtoensurethattheseafoodtheysellislabeledaccurately–andare
subjecttocivilliabilityorevencriminalpenaltieswhentheyfailtodoso.
Consumersselectseafoodforarangeofcharacteristics,includingthegeographicorigin
oftheseafoodandthemethodofcaptureorfarming.Butthemostfundamentalcharacteristicof
seafoodisitsspecies.TheFDAadministersacomprehensive“GuidetoAcceptableMarketNames
forSeafoodSoldinInterstateCommerce,”commonlyknownasthe“SeafoodList.”Thislistsets
out“whatFDAconsiderstobeacceptablemarketnamesforseafoodsoldininterstatecommerce.”
“Marketnames”refertothenamesthatsupermarketsandotherretailerscanlegallyuse
tomarketseafoodspeciesininterstatecommerce.TheSeafoodListalsoprovidesthe“common
name”thatscientistsuseasshorthandforthespecies–andwhichcanalsobeusedincommerce–
itsformalscienticname,andthenamesthataspeciesmaybeknownbyinagivenlocality,also
calledthe“vernacular”names.Giventhe“exceptionalnumberandvarietyofspecies,”theFDA
advisesthatusingacceptablemarketnamestoidentifyseafoodisessential.
15
TheFDAhasalsoissuedfurtherCompliancePolicyGuidestoassistinevaluatingwhether
particular seafood is mislabeled (or “misbranded”).
16
Under these Compliance Policy Guides,
labelingashusingnames“otherthanthoselistedascommonorusualnamesinthe‘market’or
‘common’columnsoftheSeafoodListmaymisbrandtheproduct.”
17
Forexample,theFDAhas
aspecicCompliancePolicyGuiderelatedto“redsnapper,”whichprovidesthat“[t]helabeling
orsaleofanyshotherthanLutjanus campechanusas‘redsnapper’constitutesamisbranding
12
See AlaskaSeafoodMarketingInstitute,“ThePoweroftheAlaskaSeafoodBrand,”(2017),available at https://
www.alaskaseafood.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/1-030-Power-of-the-Brand-2017.pdf.
13
SeeNewYorkStateAgricultureandMarketsLaw§201.
14
SeeNewYorkGeneralBusinessLaw§§349,350;NewYorkExecutiveLaw§63(12).
15
https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/ucm113260.htm.
16
SeeFDACPG§§540.750,540.475.
17
SeeFDACPG§540.750.
Page 7
inviolationoftheFederalFood,DrugandCosmeticAct.”
18
TheFDAenactedthisguidancein
responsetothevalueconsumersplacedonredsnapper,itslimitedavailability,andthenumerous
attemptstosubstituteitwithalessvaluablesh.
19
This report relies on the FDA’s Seafood List, along with the judgment of the National
OceanicandAtmosphericAdministration(“NOAA”),forwhatconstitutesanacceptablemarket
nameforagivenspecies.
20
Forpurposesofthisreport,shsoldunderanamenotrecognizedby
thesefederalauthoritiesasacommonnameoracceptablemarketnameforthatspeciesisdeemed
“mislabeled.”
V. How Did OAG Determine If Seafood Was Mislabeled?
NomajorregulatoryorenforcementactionintheUnitedStateshascenteredontheseafood
offeringsat chain supermarkets. Reviewing prior research, OAG identiedseafoodspeciesfor
purchasethathadahistoryofsubstitution.Onthatbasis,theinvestigationtargetedthefollowing
categories:
1. Redsnapper
2. Snapper(varietiesotherthan“red”)
3. Grouper
4. Cod
5. Wildsalmon(inclusiveofchum,Coho,sockeye,andking)
6. Halibut
7. Lemonsole
8. Sole(varietiesotherthan“lemon”)
9. Stripedbass
10.Whitetuna
21
18
SeeFDACPG§540.475.
19
Id.
20
Theremaybeexceptionswhereasellermaylegallysellthespeciesunderadifferentname,aslongasitisnot
inaccurateormisleading.
21
Althoughpaststudiesfoundthatsushirestaurantsdubbedcertainseafood“white”tuna,nosupermarketinthe
OAG’sinvestigationsoldseafoodunderthatname.Inanyevent,theFDA’sSeafoodListdoesnotrecognize“white”
tunaasanacceptablemarketnameforanyspecies.
Page 8
Duringthesecondhalfof2017andthersthalfof2018,OAGinvestigatorspurchased
theidentiedcategoriesofsh,basedonavailability,from155individualsupermarketlocations
acrossNewYork State, representing29supermarketbrands.Thesebrands(whicharelistedin
AppendixA)
22
spannedsixbroadgeographicregions:
1. AlbanythroughMid-HudsonValley;
2. Buffalo;
3. Nassau&SuffolkCounties;
4. NewYorkCity;
5. Syracuse&Utica;and
6. Westchester&RocklandCounties.
OAGsurveyedabroadanddiverse cross-section of supermarketsinNewYork.Where
practical,OAGpurchasedsamplesofsh(the“Samples”)frommultiplesupermarketsoperating
under the same name,
23
often across several days. Because OAG made purchases based on
availability, however, there was signicant variability in the number of purchases made in
particularregionsandfromparticularbrands.Themixofpurchasesthereforewasnotastatistically
representativesamplesofseafoodavailablestatewide.
Investigators recorded howthe supermarkets identiedand priced the sh for sale and
photographedtherelevantstoresignage,packaging,andreceipts.TopreparetheSamplesfortesting
andpreventcross-contamination,OAGdevelopedasamplepreparationprotocolinconsultation
withtheOceanGenomeLegacyCenter(“OGLC”),anonprotmarineresearchlaboratory.Under
theprotocol,investigatorscutasmallspecimenoftheeshofeachSampleandusedtweezers
toplaceitintoapre-numberedtesttube.Investigatorsthensealedthetesttube,whichwaspre-
lledwithaxative.AftersealingtheSampleinthetesttube,investigatorsdiscardeddisposable
supplies(gloves,razors,plates)andcompletelycleanedtheirworkspaceandanynon-disposable
tools.
Uponaccumulatinga sufcientnumberofprepared Samples,OAGsenta batchoftest
tubestotheOGLClabforspeciesidentication.OAGgavethelaboratorynoadvanceindication
ofhowtheshwaslabeledinthesupermarket.
22
ThebrandsonAppendixArepresentasampleofsupermarketsoperatinginNewYorkState.Theabsenceofa
supermarketfromthelistisnoindicationofwhetherornotitaccuratelymarketsitsseafood.Certainchainsthatsell
aselectionoffreshseafoodwerenonethelessomittedbecausetheydidnotstocktheparticularseafoodcategories
targetedwhenpurchaseswereplannedorattempted.
23
Notably,certainsupermarketsthatoperateunderagivenbrandnamearecentrally-owned,whileothersoperateas
franchisesorthroughalternativeownershipstructures.
Page 9
VI. What Method Was Used to Identify the Species?
DNAtestinghasbeenreliablyusedtoidentifyshspeciesbycomparingsamplestoasetof
validatedbarcodes.Thismethodhasbeenwidelyusedandacceptedasameansofauthenticating
seafood species by regulators and the scientic community. The FDA maintains a repository
ofFDA-validatedopen-sourceDNAbarcodesforvariousseafoodspeciescalledtheReference
Standard Sequence Library for Seafood Identication (“RSSL”).
24
For commercial species not
cataloguedintheRSSL,therearelibrariesofscienticallyreliablebarcodesavailablefromother
regulatorsandpeer-reviewedscienticsources.
OGLC, a part of Northeastern University, collaborates with the Smithsonian, NOAA,
and other major marine research institutions. OGLC served as OAG’s scientic advisor and
carriedoutalllaboratorytestingoftheSamples.UsingascienticallyvalidatedDNAbarcoding
protocol, OGLC tested the samples against available reference standards. In the rst instance,
OGLCreliedonavailableFDAreferencestandards.Forthesubsetofcommercialspecieswith
noFDAreferencestandard(e.g.,Nileperch),OGLCreliedonotherscienticallyreliablepublic
references.
25
ConsistentwithFDAstandards,OGLCrequireda500DNAbase-pairmatchbefore
conrmingthespecies.OGLCfurtherexcludedSampleswith“lowsequencequality,”i.e.,where
noreliablespeciesbarcodecouldbeidentied.
OAGappliedtheFDAapproach,whichtreatsSampleswithupto2%divergencefromthe
referencestandardtobeamatch.
26
Underthisapproach,certaindistinct,geneticallysimilarspecies
cannot be distinguished from each other. For example, “red snapper” samples are considered
correctlylabeledevenwheretestresultsaremoresuggestiveoftheclosegeneticrelativePacic
snapper.With the foregoing qualications,this report nds Samples tobe “mislabeled” where
OGLCtestingidentiedadenitivebarcodeassociatedwithadifferentspeciesthantheseafood
asmarketed.
24
See ReferenceStandardSequenceLibraryforSeafoodIdentication(RSSL),available at https://www.fda.gov/
Food/FoodScienceResearch/DNASeafoodIdentication/ucm238880.htm.
25
Toidentifyscienticallyreliablepublicreferences,OGLCreliedontheBarcodeofLifeDataSystems(also
knownasBOLD)andGenBank,thegeneticsequencedatabaseadministeredbytheNationalInstitutesofHealth.
26
SeeDNA-basedSeafoodIdentication,available at https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScienceResearch/
DNASeafoodIdentication/ucm237391.htm.
Page 10
VII. What Were the Overall Testing Results?
Testing revealedatroublingly highrateof suspectedmislabelingoverall thataffecteda
broadcross-sectionofsupermarketsinNewYork.Asreectedbelow,theproblemwasparticularly
acuteforcertainseafoodspeciesandcategories,incertainareas,andatcertainsupermarketchains.
Testingrevealed:
1. A Sky-High Mislabeling Rate. MorethanoneineveryfourSamples(26.92%,or77out
of286totalSamples)withanidentiablebarcodefailedtocomebackasamatchfor
themarketnameofthespeciesaslabeled.
Chart 1.
2. Suspected Mislabeling Involving Virtually Every Type of Seafood Investigated. Testing
found substitutions for nearly every target species or category purchased in the
investigation.Theloneexceptionwasstripedbass.
27
3. An Especially High Rate of Suspected Mislabeling for Certain Seafood Species. The
investigationfoundrampantmislabelingincertainspecies,includinglemonsole(14out
of16or87.5%),redsnapper(31out46or67%),grouper(5outof8or62.5%),chinook/
kingsalmon(5outof16or31.25%),and“wild”salmon(8outof29or27.59%),which
canlegallyrefertoseveralspecies.Afewspecieswererarelymislabeled,includingcod
(2outof49or4.08%),sockeyesalmon(2outof50or4%),andstripedbass(0outof
3or0%).
27
Duetolimitedavailability,onlythreeSamplesofstripedbasswerepurchased.Testingconrmedthatallthree
werecorrectlylabeled.
Page 11
Chart 2.
4. Rates of Mislabeling Vary Across Different Regions of New York State.NewYorkCity
supermarkets had the highest rate of suspected mislabeling (42.65%), followed by
Nassau/Suffolk (40.63%), and Westchester/Rockland (32.43%). The 42.65% rate of
mislabelinginNewYorkCityareasupermarketsfor2017-2018exceedsthe29%rate
identiedinOceana’s2012study.NomislabelingwasfoundinBuffalosupermarkets.
Notably, the mislabeling rates reect averages, and a relatively small number of
supermarkets(discussedinItem6below)aredisproportionatelyresponsibleforthe
highermislabelingratesdownstate.
Page 12
Chart 3.
5. Certain Supermarket Brands Had Especially High Levels of Suspected Mislabeling.
Nearlytwo-thirds(19outof29or65.52%)ofsupermarketbrandsinthestudysold
atleastoneSamplesuspectedofmislabeling.Butthirteenoutofthe29supermarket
brandsintheinvestigationhadratesofsuspectedmislabelingof25%orhigher.Five
ofthe12supermarketbrandsfromwhichOAGpurchased10ormore Sampleshad
ratesofsuspectedmislabelingexceeding50%.TheseincludedFoodBazaar(52.63%),
Foodtown (55.17%), Stew Leonard’s (53.85%), Uncle Giuseppe’s (55.56%), and
WesternBeef(66.67%).OAGdirectedenforcementletterstothesevechains,which
aresubjecttofurtherinvestigation.
Themislabelingofseafoodspecieshasseriousconsequencesforconsumers,theseafood
marketplace,andtheenvironment.Asmorefullydetailedinthenextsection, theinvestigation
reachedthefollowingbroadndings:
1. Cheaper Species Were Often Mislabeled as More Expensive Species. In most instances
whereOAGhadpricingdataforthesubstitutespecies,thesubstitutesoldformorewhen
mislabeled as a more coveted species than when properly labeled. This included, for
example,farmedsalmonsoldaswild,andyellowtailoundersoldaslemonsole.
2. Mislabeled Substitutes Often Undersold Competitors Selling the Real Thing. While
overchargingcustomers,supermarketstendedtoofferthemislabeledshforlessthanthe
averagepriceforthedesiredspecies.Thisundercutsresponsiblecompetitorssellingthe
Page 13
genuineproduct,andunderminesthemarketasawhole.
3. Species Shunned for Health Reasons Were Sold as Preferred Species.Incertaininstances,
thesubstitutespecieswasknowntohavehigherlevelsofmercuryandotherheavymetals
thanthelabeledspecies,includinglanesnappersoldasredsnapperandAtlanticsalmon
soldaskingsalmon.Similarly,manyselectwildseafoodtoavoidtheantibioticsandother
chemicalssometimesusedonfarmedseafood.Yetinmanycases,“wild”seafoodSamples
testedasfarmedspecies.
4. Environmentally Harmful Seafood Options Were Passed Off as More Sustainable Species.
Manyconsumersdesiretobuyspeciesthatarelessenvironmentallyharmful.Yetinmany
instances,thesubstitutesareconsideredlesseco-friendlythantheintendedspecies.This
includedsnowygroupersoldasredgrouper,lanesnappersoldasredsnapper,andyellowtail
oundersoldaslemonsole.
VIII. What Types of Seafood Were Most Commonly Mislabeled?
Asmorefullyexploredbelow,threeofthemostfrequentlymislabeledseafoodcategories
were(1)wildsalmon;(2)lemonsole;and(3)redsnapper.
28
Eachsectionprovidescomparison
pointsbetweentheintendedspeciesandthesubstitutespeciesacrossvariousdimensions,focusing
on attributes where certain substitute species would be less preferable to consumers. Notably,
OAGdidnotconductarobustmarketpricingsurvey;conclusionsrelatedtopricingareillustrative
andderivedfromthelimitednumberofpurchasesOAGmadeinthecourseofitsinvestigation.
1. Wild Salmon
Salmonisthesecond-mostpopulartypeofseafoodsoldintheUnitedStates.
29
Whilethe
percentageofwild-caughtsalmonuctuatesyear-to-year,in2011,itconstitutedaboutone-thirdof
totalsalmonsoldintheUnitedStates.
30
Wildsalmonproperlyencompassesseveraldistinctwild-
caught species, including chinook/king (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), sockeye (Oncorhynchus
nerka),Coho(Oncorhynchus kisutch),andchum(Oncorhynchus keta).Atlanticsalmon(Salmo
salar)—oneoftheworld’smostpopularfarmedshspecies—isendangeredinthewildandisnot
commerciallysoldintheUnitedStates.Therefore,SamplesofAtlanticsalmonsoldas“wild”are
mislabeled.
28
Althoughothertypesofsnapperandgrouperalsohadhighmislabelingrates,thereportdoesnotdelveasdeeply
intothosecategoriesduetothemorelimitedavailabilityoftherelevantspecieswhenmakingpurchases.
29
ScienceofFood(NaturePartnerJournal)“Safelymeetingglobalsalmondemand,”Availableathttps://www.
nature.com/articles/s41538-018-0025-5.
30
NOAA,“2011Top10FavoriteSeafoodsintheUnitedStates,”Available at https://www.sheries.noaa.gov/2011-
top-10-favorite-seafoods-united-states.
Page 14
Testing showed that eight of the 29 Samples labeled simply as “wild” salmon without
identifyingaparticularwildspecies(27.59%)weremislabeled.Thesubstitutespeciesincluded
Atlanticsalmon(Salmo salar)andrainbowtrout(Oncorhynchus mykiss),whichisnotatypeof
salmonatall.Theremaining21Samples(72.41%)weresalmonspeciescommerciallyshedin
thewild.Thisanalysistreatsthosespeciesascorrectlylabeled“wild.”
31
Seafoodspecicallylabeledaschinook/kingsalmonhadanevenhighermislabelingrate
(31.25%).Otherspeciedsalmonspecies,Cohoandsockeye,hadlowermislabelingrates.
Chart 4.
NearlyallmislabeledsalmonSamplestestedasfarmedAtlanticsalmonorrainbowtrout.
Intwoinstances,however,Cohosalmonwasmislabeledassockeye.
Table 1.
Species of Fish Substituted for Wild Species of Salmon
Scientic Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name
1
Oncorhynchus kisutch
CohoSalmon
Salmon,CohoorSilverorMediumRed
(MislabeledasSockeyeSalmon)
2
Oncorhynchus mykiss
RainbowTrout Trout,RainboworSteelhead
3
Salmo salar
AtlanticSalmon Salmon
31
DNAbarcodingcannotdistinguishbetweenwild-caughtandfarmedshofthesamespecies.Becausecertain
wildcaughtvarietiesarealsofarm-raised,includingchinook/king(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)andCohosalmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch),thetotalmislabelinggureslikelyunderestimatethedegreeofmislabelingof“wild”salmon.
Page 15
PRICING: WHEN FARMED ATLANTIC SALMON IS MISLABELED AS WILD
SALMON, CONSUMERS PAY INFLATED PRICES.
Fish sold as “wild” salmon (without identifying a particular wild species) command a
higherpricethanfarmedsalmon.OAGinvestigatorsboughtseafoodlabeledasAtlantic
salmon, farmed salmon, or simply as salmon for an average price $11.34 per pound.
32
Whenfarmedsalmonwasmislabeledaswildsalmon,however,theaveragepricespiked
by34%,to$15.24perpound.ItspikedevenhigherforSamplessoldasspecic,highly
coveted varieties of wild salmon. For example, Samples mislabeled as chinook/king
salmonsoldforanaveragepriceperpoundof$20.99.Thatprice,however,stillundercut
competitors,whocharged$24.71perpoundonaverageforauthenticchinook/kingsalmon.
Suchmislabelingharmsconsumers–whooverpayforcheaperspecies–andcompetitors
–whocannotcompetelegitimatelyatthoseprices.
32
AlthoughAtlanticsalmonwasnotatargetedspecies,OAGinvestigatorspurchased15samplesofcorrectlylabeled
Atlanticsalmoninthecourseoftheinvestigation,andwhichserveasacomparison.
Chart 5.
Page 16
HEALTH: WHEN ATLANTIC SALMON IS MISLABELED AS WILD SALMON,
CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE A FARMED SPECIES WITH A POTENTIAL FOR
CHEMICAL RESIDUE AND WITH A DIFFERENT NUTRITIONAL PROFILE.
CertainconsumerswillavoidAtlanticsalmonandfarmedrainbowtroutbasedexclusively
on concerns about the antibiotics or other chemicals sometimes used in industrial
aquaculture.Wild and farmed salmon also have different nutritional characteristics that
mayberelevanttoconsumers.Theyhavedifferentlevelsofheavymetals,andwildsalmon
tendstobeleanerandmaycontainlowerlevelsoftheomega-3fattyaciddocosahexaenoic
acid(DHA).
33
SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN RAINBOW TROUT AND FARMED SALMON ARE
MISLABELED AS WILD SALMON, CONSUMERS MAY GET LESS ECO-FRIENDLY
SPECIES.
Farmingofbothsalmonandrainbowtrout,thecommonsubstitutesforwildsalmon,raise
concerns about efuent pollution and chemical use. Seafood Watch designates specic
species of wild salmon—sockeye and chum—as either a “Good Alternative” or “Best
Choice,”whileurgingconsumersto“Avoid”certainfarmedvarieties.
2. Lemon Sole
Lemon sole is an acceptable market name for Microstomus kitt, a popular European
atsh.IntheUnitedStates,lemonsoleisalsoanacceptablemarketnameforblackbackounder
(Pseudopleuronectes americanus), ashfoundon theAtlantic seaboardoftheUnited States.
34
TwoSamples(12.5%)outofthe16labeledaslemonsoletestedasthisspecies.Theremaining14
(87.5%)weremislabeled,failingtotestaseitherofthespeciesproperlysoldaslemonsoleinthe
U.S.
33
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935116311811?via%3Dihub.
34
See NOAANortheastMultispeciesSpeciesListforWinterFlounder,available at https://www.greateratlantic.
sheries.noaa.gov/nero/shermen/images/multispecies/pages/winter%20ounder.html.
Page 17
Chart 6.
Ingeneral,supermarketssoldarangeofwhite-eshedshspecies–ounders,ukes,and
soles–aslemonsole.OneSamplelabeledaslemonsoletestedasswai(Pangasius hypophthalmus),
acheap,typicallyfarmedshspeciesformerlyknownintheUnitedStatesas“Vietnamesecatsh.”
35
Table 2.
Species of Fish Substituted for Lemon Sole
(Microstomus kitt orPseudopleuronectes americanus)
Scientic Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name
1
Glyptocephalus cynoglossus
WitchFlounder GraySoleorSoleorFlounder
2
Hippoglossoides platessoides
AmericanPlaice PlaiceorFlounder
3
Hippoglossoides robustus
BeringFlounder Flounder
4
Limanda aspera
YellownSole SoleorFlounder
5
Limanda ferruginea
YellowtailFlounder FlounderorSole
6
Pangasius hypophthalmus
Swai
SwaiorSutchiorStripedPangasius
orTra
7
Paralichthys dentatus
SummerFlounder FlounderorFluke
8
Paralichthys lethostigma
SouthernFlounder FlounderorFluke
9
Pleuronectes platessus
EuropeanPlaice PlaiceorFlounder
35
Cf. 21U.S.C.§321d(restrictingthenamecatshtoshclassiedwithinthefamilyIctaluridae).
Page 18
PRICING: MISLABELING CHEAPER FISH AS LEMON SOLE HARMS CONSUMERS
AND LEGITIMATE COMPETITORS.
Fish sold as lemon sole command a higher price than substitutes like ounder or sole
when sold under acceptable market names. For example, the ve Samples properly
labeledasyellowtailounder soldforanaverage price of$11.39perpound.Thethree
Samplesofyellowtailoundermislabeledaslemonsole,however,hadanaverageprice
of$13.99perpound.Bycontrast,thesalespriceofthetwocorrectlylabeledSamplesof
lemonsoleaveraged$22.49 perpound.Theapparentresultisthatmislabelinglemonsole
simultaneouslyharmsconsumers –whooverpayfor acheaperspecies–andlegitimate
competitors–whoareundercutbyfraudulentbusinesspractices.
Chart 7.
Page 19
HEALTH: WHEN FARMED FISH IS MISLABELED AS LEMON SOLE, CONSUMERS
MAY RECEIVE LESS HEALTHY SUBSTITUTES.
Certain consumers intentionallyselect wild, ratherthan farm-raised speciesfor various
reasons,includingdueto nutritional differencesor to avoideatingseafoodtreated with
antibiotics,pesticides,orotherchemicals.Whilelemonsoleiswildcaught,oneSample
labeledaslemonsoleturnedouttobeswai,ashtypicallyfarmedinVietnamandassociated
withhighlevelsofaquaculturalchemicaluse.
36
Chart 8.
SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN OTHER FISH ARE MISLABELED AS LEMON SOLE,
CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE SPECIES THAT ARE LESS ENVIRONMENTALLY
SUSTAINABLE.
EnvironmentalorganizationsgivethemorecommonAmericanlemonsolespecies,also
known as blackback ounder, middling-to-poor sustainability ratings, including due to
suspected overshing and thepotentialto catch endangered species atthe same time.
37
Certain species mislabeled as lemon sole, however, do even worse. For example, the
Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch Program designated blackback ounder a
“GoodAlternative” when caught in the NorthwestAtlantic, specically in the Gulf of
Maine.Meanwhile,SeafoodWatch urgedconsumersto“Avoid”thecommonsubstitute
of yellowtail ounder when caught in the very same waters. Seafood Watch likewise
urgedeco-consciousconsumersto“avoid”swaiduetothechemicalsusedinfarmingand
associatedefuentpollution.
36
MontereyBayAquariumSeafoodWatch,“Pangasius,”Available at https://www.seafoodwatch.org/-/m/sfw/pdf/
reports/c/mba_seafoodwatch_catsh_vietnam_report.pdf.
37
MontereyBayAquariumSeafoodWatch,“Flounder:Blackback,”Available at http://www.seafoodwatch.org/
seafood-recommendations/groups/ounder?type=blackback&o=471592711.
Page 20
3. Red Snapper
RedSnapperisthecommonnameofLutjanus campechanus,ahighly-prizedshindigenous
totheNorthAtlantic.AsspelledoutinanFDACompliancePolicyGuide,theonlyshspeciesthat
cancarrythenameredsnapperisLutjanus campechanus.Becauseofhistoricovershing,thesh
issubjecttoasheriesmanagementplanandisoftenrelativelyexpensive.Yetoutof46Samples
labeled“redsnapper,”31(67%)purchasesfrom10supermarketchainsfailedtotestasLutjanus
campechanus. DNA barcoding conrmedthe correct species in only15 out of 46 redsnapper
Samples(33%).
Testing suggests that supermarkets mislabeled at least 12 other species as red snapper.
Thesesubstituteswereoftenothersnappertypes,includingsomenotindigenoustotheAtlantic
Ocean, e.g., the PaciccaughtTwinspot Snapper (Lutjanus bohar).
38
Golden redsh (Sebastes
norvegicus),whichmaybesoldasoceanperch,wasanothersubstitute.
Table 3.
Species of Fish Substituted for Red Snapper
(Lutjanus campechanus)
Scientic Name Common Name FDA Acceptable Market Name
1
Lutjanus bohar
TwinspotSnapper Snapper
2
Lutjanus erythropterus
CrimsonSnapper Snapper
3
Lutjanus guttatus
SpottedRoseSnapper Snapper
4
Lutjanus malabaricus
MalabarSnapper Snapper
5
Lutjanus synagris
LaneSnapper Snapper
6
Lutjanus vivanus
SilkSnapper Snapper
7
Ocyurus chrysurus
YellowtailSnapper Snapper
8
Pinjalo pinjalo
Pinjalo Snapper
9
Pristipomoides multidens
GoldbandedJobsh JobshorSnapper
10
Pristipomoides typus
SharptoothJobsh JobshorSnapper
11
Rhomboplites aurorubens VermillionSnapper
Snapper
12
Sebastes norvegicus
GoldenRedsh OceanPerch
38
See Russell,B.,Smith-Vaniz,W.F.,Lawrence,A.,Carpenter,K.E.&Myers,R.,“Lutjanus bohar.The IUCN Red
List of Threatened Species,”(2016),available at http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/194363/0.
Page 21
WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER, CONSUMERS PAY
INFLATED PRICES.
Testingrevealedthatothersnapperswerepassedoffasredsnapper.Theaveragemarket
priceforthoseother snappers, whencorrectlylabeled,wassignicantly lower thanred
snapper.Asillustratedinthechartbelow,thefteencorrectlylabeledredsnapperSamples
averaged $17.59 per pound.
39
By contrast, the 13 correctly labeled Samples of other
snappersaveraged$8.29perpound.
40
SnapperSampleswhenmislabeledasredsnapper
averaged$10.38perpound–withcustomerspayingmorethanforwhenthesamespecies
wascorrectlylabeled.
Chart 9.
39
PricingnumbersreecttheparticularSamplesavailableandpurchasedinthecourseofOAG’sinvestigation.OAG
didnotconductamarketpricingsurvey.
40
ThenineSamplesaccuratelysoldasa“snapper,”not“redsnapper,”representvedistinctsnappervariants:
Lutjanus guttatus/SpottedRoseSnapper,Lutjanus malabaricus/MalabarSnapper,Lutjanus synagris/LaneSnapper,
Ocyurus chrysurus/YellowtailSnapper,andPinjalo pinjalo/Pinjalo.Asreectedonthechartabove,eachofthese
specieshasattimesalsobeenusedasasubstitute.
Page 22
HEALTH: WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER,
CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE FISH WITH HIGHER MERCURY LEVELS.
EDFratesredsnapperashavinga“moderate”levelofmercurycontamination,whichis
similartomostofthesubstitutesidentied.EDFfound,however,thatonesubstitute,lane
snapperhas“elevated”mercurylevels.
SUSTAINABILITY: WHEN OTHER SNAPPERS ARE MISLABELED AS RED SNAPPER,
CONSUMERS MAY RECEIVE LESS ECO-FRIENDLY SPECIES.
Eco-consciousconsumerswouldselectredsnapperovermanyoftheidentiedsubstitutes.
TheEDFratedredsnapperas“OK.”Twooftheidentiedsubstitutes–silksnapperand
pinjalo – received EDF’s “Worst” eco-Rating.The MontereyAquarium SeafoodWatch
program identies red snapper from the Gulf of Mexico as a “Good Alternative.” By
contrast,theSeafoodWatchprogramurgesbuyersto“Avoid”oneofthesubstitutes–lane
snapper–whencaughtintheGulfofMexico.
Page 23
IX. How Can Supermarkets Combat the Seafood Fraud Epidemic?
Aswithallpurchases,consumersshouldrecognize:ifthepriceofseafoodseemstoogood
tobetrue,thatmaybeasignthattheyarenotgettingwhattheypaidfor.Theyshouldalsoexpect
theirsupermarketstoprovidepreciselabelingoftheseafoodtheysellanddescribetheirseafood
qualityandsustainabilitypractices.Theultimateresponsibilityforaccuratelymarketingseafood,
however,fallssquarelyontheretailersthemselves.
While there are other broken links in the seafood supply chain, supermarkets (and
restaurants) represent the nal line of defense before a phony sh ends up as family dinner.
Fortunately,therearebasicstepsretailerscantaketoguaranteethattheyarebeingstraightwith
seafood consumers. Many already are. OAG reviewed the best seafood practices across the
supermarketindustry,includingtheprotocolsineffectatresponsiblesupermarkets,mostnotably
theHannafordchain(whichhasalargenumberofstoresinUpstateNewYork,alargeseafood
selection,andnoinstancesof suspectedmislabeling),orrecommendedby theFoodMarketing
Institute,anindustryassociation.
41
Thesuccessofaseafoodqualitycontrolprogramdependsonamulti-stepprogramthat
incorporates suppliers, supermarket management, and seafood department employees. Seafood
departmentbestpracticesinclude:
1. Supplier Validation.
a. Vet the history and accreditations of all seafood suppliers. This should include
independently conrming third-party accreditation, contacting other customers,
and,wherepossible,visitingthesupplier’sfacilities.
b. Require seafood suppliers to sign a pledge committing to clear, accurate, and
preciseproductlabelingandoutsideauditing(seeitem4).Theagreementshould
setoutexplicitconsequences,includingtermination,forfailingtodeliverproducts
meetingtherequiredspecications.
c. Foreachproduct,prepareadetailedspecicationsheetandsubmitittothesupplier.
Inadditiontootherrequirements, this specication sheetshouldincorporatethe
scienticandcommonnameofthespeciesaswellasitsacceptablemarketname.
d. Requireconsistentlabelingacrossallproductdocumentation,includingpurchase
orders,shippinglabels,andinvoices.
2. Training and Store Policies.
a. Educateemployeesinvolvedintheseafoodprogramoftheirresponsibilitytofollow
proceduresdesignedtoensurecustomerreceivetheproductmarketed.
b. Train staff and furnish manuals on standard seafood identication and labeling
41
FoodMarketingInstitute,“BestPracticesonHowtoMitigatetheRiskofSeafoodFraud,”(2017),available at
https://www.fmi.org/docs/default-source/industry-topics-doc/seafood-fraud-nal.pdf?sfvrsn=23527b6e_2.
Page 24
procedures(e.g.,ensurethatstoresignageisconsistentwithinvoicesandshipping
labels).
c. RequirefamiliaritywiththeFDA’sSeafoodListandthedistinguishingcharacteristics
oftheseafoodspeciescommonlysoldinthestore.
d. Verifythattheseafooddeliveredexactlymatchesthedetailedspecicationsheet
furnishedtothesupplier.
3. Seafood Labeling and Signage.
a. Useaconsistentformatforallseafoodsignsandlabels,usingthenamingguidelines
ontheFDASeafoodList.
b. Ensurethatthespeciesaslabeledinthestorematchesthespeciesasrepresentedby
thesupplier,andfullyresolveanydiscrepancies.
c. Inadditiontospeciesname,describethecapturemethod(e.g.,line-caught),origin
(e.g.,GulfofMaine),andwhethertheseafoodwaspreviouslyfrozen.
d. Postsignagesuchthatitisfullyvisiblenexttotherelevantproduct.
e. Checkandupdatesignageandlabelingregularly.
4. Traceability and Auditing.
a. Establishatraceabilityprotocolinconcertwithsupplierstoenablethetrackingof
seafoodbacktoitssource.
b. Conductdirectand/orthird-partyauditingofsupplierfacilities,and,wherepossible,
theultimateseafoodsource,includingthroughtheuseofDNAtesting.
c. Auditsupermarketlocationsperiodicallytomonitoradherencetoseafood-related
procedures,includingspottestingtoconrmseafoodidentity.
5. Customer Education.
a. Describe the attributes of different types of seafood in store, including the
signicanceoforiginandmethodofcapture.
b. Provide consumers with accurate information about other aspects of seafood,
includingsustainabilityandperceivedhealthdifferences.
c. Makeinformationrelatingtothesupermarket’sseafoodauthenticityandtraceability
programavailabletocustomers,includinginstoreandontheweb.
is Report was prepared by Senior Advisor and Special Counsel to the Attorney
General Simon Brandler of the Executive Division, Special Counsel Mary Alestra of
the Consumer Frauds & Protection Bureau, and paralegal Christine Reynolds also
of the Consumer Frauds & Protection Bureau. Its preparation was supervised
by Bureau Chief Jane Azia, Executive Deputy Attorney General Manisha M. Sheth,
Chief of Staff & Deputy Attorney General Brian Mahanna, and Chief Deputy
Attorney General Janet Sabel.
Page A1
APPENDIX – A
1. Adams FairacreFarms
2. BestMarket
3. BrooklynHarvest
4. C-Town
5. Dash’s
6. DeCicco’s
7. Fairway
8. FoodBazaar
9. FoodEmporium
10.Foodtown
11.GourmetGarage
12.Hannaford
13.KeyFood
14.KingKullen
15.MetFood
16.MortonWilliams
17.PriceChopper
18.PriceChopper(Market32)
19.PriceRite
20.ShopRite
21.StewLeonard’s
22.Stop&Shop
23.TheFreshMarket
24.Tops
25.Uncle Giuseppe’s
26.Walmart
27.Wegmans
28.WesternBeef
29.WholeFoods
Appendix - A
Page B1
Appendix - B
Page B2
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B3
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B4
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B5
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B6
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B7
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B8
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B9
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B10
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B11
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B12
Appendix - B - Continued
Page B13
Appendix - B - Continued
Ofce of the New York State Attorney General | www.ag.ny.gov | 1-800-771-7755