MN Omnibus Bill Fails

MLBA needed to win this battle or risk losing members after losing Sunday Sales earlier in the legislature. Rumor has it there are more craft brewery bills coming down the pipe for a vote. Expect more battles in this changing industry. IMO, some of it's good and some of it's bad.

 

The amendment was removed and the bill passed the House. It is now headed to conference committee.
https://growlermag.com/amendment-removed-minnesota-liquor-omnibus-bill-passes-house/

 

The bill is dead for this legislative session. There was too much pushback from the Senate.

 

Everyone really wants to be able to sell a sip for just fifteen cents -- Right?

Best of luck to those who wish to overturn Minnesota's infamous blue laws.

 

I did not know they had a 64 ounce growler in the regulations. What about those growlers larger then 64 ounces? Can they only have a partial fill?

 

The state seems to be pretty lenient. I know Wild Mind had their 2L growlers approved without any stipulations for how full they can fill it.

 

Really?? I must be forgetting, but when did the law pass where breweries could sell anything other than 64oz and 750ml? That's the entire reason why the stupid half growlers aren't actually half of a growler and why they are allowed to sell the 750ml bottles, but not any other size (12oz, 500ml, 16oz, 22oz and so on).

 

Guess I never realized there were oz limited to sales and pours.

Does that mean my buddy who has the arriving on his door step this week will never be able to have it filled?

https://mancan.beer/collections/mancans/products/copy-of-mancan-128-flex-kit-1

 

Interesting, seems like a great device to have for small gatherings. I'll be curious to see how many breweries know of the oz restrictions in place and if he's able to get it filled around town. You'd think he could just pay for two growlers and they'd fill it.

 

I'll be curious to see if you find a brewery that does this in Minnesota because if they don't understand this law then odds are they may not be around for much longer.

 

Just go with a buddy. You pay for the first 64ozs and he pays for the second... or just get 64oz in that and get a second "regular" growler filled then pour it in the man can.

 

I want to address the persistent myth that breweries and brewpubs in Minnesota can refill only 64 oz. growlers and 750 mL bottles. That is inaccurate. The plain language of the law (since 2015) allows breweries and brewpubs to "refill any container or bottle... at the request of the customer." The container has to be sealed and labeled in a certain, easy-to-achieve way, and it must be filled at the tap at the time of sale unless it is 64 oz. or 750 mL. If the brewery or brewpub chooses to package the beer in advance, it's limited to "64-ounce containers commonly known as 'growlers' or... 750 milliliter bottles" (and bottles have been interpreted broadly to include cans). But the law permits customers to bring in containers of any size to be filled at the tap, I suspect specifically to accommodate customers who own non-standard-sized containers. I've run this language by a lawyer (admittedly in an unrelated field of law) and, without giving him my interpretation, I asked if a 32 oz., 2 liter, or 128 oz. growler may be filled at the tap by a brewery or brewpub in Minnesota. He answered unequivocally "yes" and added that he believes a brewery would win in court if the state attempted to penalize it for filling "any container" because the language of the statute is so clear. Bear in mind that 1) many breweries do not price for non-standard fill sizes and 2) the misunderstanding of the law is widespread, so, in practice, you may struggle to get an odd-sized container filled. There is, however, no legal obstacle.

340A.285 GROWLERS.
(a) Malt liquor authorized for off-sale pursuant to section 340A.24 or 340A.28 shall be packaged in 64-ounce containers commonly known as "growlers" or in 750 milliliter bottles. The containers or bottles shall bear a twist-type closure, cork, stopper, or plug. At the time of sale, a paper or plastic adhesive band, strip, or sleeve shall be applied to the container or bottle and extended over the top of the twist-type closure, cork, stopper, or plug forming a seal that must be broken upon opening the container or bottle. The adhesive band, strip, or sleeve shall bear the name and address of the brewer. The containers or bottles shall be identified as malt liquor, contain the name of the malt liquor, bear the name and address of the brew pub or brewer selling the malt liquor, and shall be considered intoxicating liquor unless the alcoholic content is labeled as otherwise in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rules, part 7515.1100.

(b) A brew pub or brewer may, but is not required to, refill any container or bottle with malt liquor for off-sale at the request of the customer. A brew pub or brewer refilling a container or bottle must do so at its licensed premises and the container or bottle must be filled at the tap at the time of sale. A container or bottle refilled under this paragraph must be sealed and labeled in the manner described in paragraph (a).

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=340A.285

 

While you may be correct, the original law was specifically for 64 oz. The 750ml was added later. The new paragraph (b) appears to create a loophole that was never the intention of the original law.

 

I don't think they have to reference "64 oz." each time they want to mention the word container. Acceptable volumes were defined earlier. If it's a myth then I think we would see tap rooms selling 12 oz cans/bottles and bombers.

Note: I am not a lawyer but like arguing on the Internet

 

I partially agree. The language of the statute through 2014 permitted refills only of "growlers," which elsewhere in the law were defined as 64 oz. containers, so 750 mL bottles from outside sources (including "growlettes") could not be refilled. The language was changed in 2015 to allow "any container." I would not necessarily call it a "loophole" because I believe the change was intentional and designed to accommodate customers who bring in non-standard containers. The legislature easily could've left the old language in place or added "750 mL bottles" to the refill eligibility category if that is all it intended. However, the change was not widely publicized and clearly not widely realized. Note that the law distinguishes between "packaged" products (which most directly compete with products that go through the three-tier distribution channels) and those "filled at the tap at the time of sale."

This is the previous language (emphasis mine):

"A brewer may, but is not required to, refill any growler with malt liquor for
off-sale at the request of a customer. A brewer refilling a growler must do so at its licensed
premises and the growler must be filled at the tap at the time of sale. A growler refilled
under this paragraph must be sealed and labeled in the manner described in paragraph (a)."

(See lines 5.20 through 5.23.)

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/te...ssion=ls88&session_year=2014&session_number=0

 

I think this is the most common interpretation. It is curious that the language of a regulation with such focus is worded so ambiguously. There are also other provisions in the previous section that are not really followed in many cases, as far as I have experienced (The containers or bottles shall...contain the name of the malt liquor, bear the name and address of the brewer selling the malt liquor...).

 

Perhaps, but I think you're reading too much into it. While working on the first growler bill, I saw many mistakes made in wording. It's generally caused by (as potentially in this case) attempting to tweak something without rewriting the entire section.

The fact that they chose to change the law to allow brewers to fill other breweries growlers could be an indication - it was never prohibited to begin with. In addition, there doesn't appear to be any stipulation for a Surgeon General's Warning. Can I legally fill a milk jug? The Alcoholic Beverage Labeling Act (ABLA) of 1998 seems to permit it if it is filled at the time of purchase. If it is filled in advance, it has to have the warning.

This was simply lifted from the TTB. It has more to do with determining tax/labeling requirements than anything else.