Well, whether it was 'accurate' depends on whether the intention of the law writers was this liberal reading. Which is unclear; I expect if they actually meant

Well, whether it was 'accurate' depends on whether the intention of the law writers was this liberal reading. Which is unclear; I expect if they actually meant `packing for (distribution or shipping)` there would be another or before packing: > The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, OR packing for shipment or distribution of ... as the last logical entry in a list almost always starts with a conjunction. So the intention probably was to exclude distribution from extra pay, but the phrasing was lax enough to allow this liberal interpretation.