Ezra,
Thanks for the compliment!
The current FPLA requires “duality” of labeling.
The NIST Handbook 133 (Page 15) requires verification of the “larger of the two
declarations.
Amendment of the current FPLA is necessary to make metric-only *labeling* a
legal reality.
However, Metric-Only
FYI
- Forwarded message from cont...@metricpioneer.com -
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:53:53 -0700
From: cont...@metricpioneer.com
Subject: Senator Boquist - Chief Sponsor of LC0044
To: Sen Boquist sen.brianboqu...@state.or.us
Cc: Rep Boles rep.denycbo...@state.or.us
O!
As always, your clarifications really help, Gene. :-)
The bottom line for me is whether companies will interpret this new enforcement
policy as an unofficial permission slip to label their packages using only SI
units so long as they ensure that the amount indicated is equal to (modulo
If I owned a company not sure I would violate the law just because someone says
they “wont enforce’ it but some might. It think the impact will be small but
it’s a start.
Howard Ressel
Project Design Engineer
NYSDOT
1530 Jefferson Road
Rochester, NY 14623
585 272-3372
43,560 square feet in
But that is a big IF. If filled to 454 g and 1 lb is claimed, 454 g is the
larger claim and is what must be check under the current law. However, many
packages are labeled 453 g | 1 lb in which case 1 lb is the larger claim and
must be checked.
I don't see that checking only the smaller
But I thought that the proposal was that a company could package their product
and label its weight, volume, etc. only in SI and that the only enforcement
would be that the actual weight, volume, etc. was equal to or greater than what
was stated on the package in SI only units.
- Original
The table of Maximum Allowed Variations on Page 98 of HB 133 states
for More than 426 g to 489 g the MAV is 19.9 g!
With that *large* MAV of 19.9 g, why quibble over which declaration must be
verified
e.g. 453 g, 453.592 g, or 454 g?
The actual fill may have a negative error of 19.9 g for some
However, the lot average must still validate the larger claim via what is
basically a student-t test. Therefore, if standard deviation is large, the
average must exceed the claim by a larger amount to prove the claim.
I wonder if underfills as large as allowed ever occur. It seems to me the
