Does anyone have the details of the impact of this Directive?  How many   
of the following "packaging" type items are within its scope:

 - product labels
 - boxes
 - owner's manuals
 - service manuals
 - brochures
 - advertising

Also does anyone know if there is any middle ground?  Perhaps the clutter   
of interspersing metric and imperial (for lack of a better term) units is   
the problem, in which case physical segregation would be a possible   
solution.

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Jim Eichner
Statpower Technologies Corp.
Burnaby, B.C., Canada
[email protected]
Any opinions expressed are those of my invisible friend, who really   
exists.  Honest.


 -----Original Message-----
From: sdouglas@anetMHS (DouglasScott){MHS:[email protected]}
Sent: Monday, November 03, 1997 11:02 AM
To: emc-pstc@anetMHS ("emc-pstc"){MHS:[email protected]}; ; mprg@anetMHS   
("Jim McCracken"){MHS:[email protected]}; jeichner; bceresne
Subject: Metrics #2

   



 ---------------[ Content-type: text/plain; name=Message Body   
]--------------
Hi to All,

After reasding the various emails re: metrics, I phoned NIST and talked   
to the
 about this. I talked to Jim McCracken, Metric Coordinator of the Metric   
Progr
m at NIST.

First, the email from "Maureen Breitenburg, subject Business Alert -   
Received
rom NIST Metric Program" was a repeat of a statement from the NIST Metric   
Prog
am. The capital letters used in this email were added and were not from   
the Me
ric Program statement.

Second, the Metric Directive is, in fact, still in effect. 80/181/EEC was   
the
riginal and had an effective date of 1/1/90 and required the use only of   
SI un
ts after that date. Directive 89/617/EEC changed the effective date from   
1/1/9
 to 1/1/2000. These directives are in effect and there have been no legal   
chan
es to the requirements or effective dates.

Third, there was a draft document, 91C185, which was put out for voting   
but wa
 never voted on. That document was a proposal to consolidate the changes   
made
y the 80 and 89 directives. I think that directive 85/1/EEC which added   
some S
 units to the list required by 80/181/EEC was included in the 91C185   
document
onsolidation proposal.

The 'C' in the document number indicates commentary or proposal and is   
not def
nitive (legal). The document 97C 2/02 is the withdrawal of the 1996 draft   
porp
sal to make 91C185 a legal directive.

So, as best I understand what Mr. McCracken said, the original and it's   
effect
ve date modifying directive still stand and will require SI only units be   
used
after 1/1/2000.

Fourth, there is a problem in the US because some of our laws require   
BOTH met
ic and non-metric measures on certain packaging. We will either have to   
have t
o packages or change our laws.

NIST is planning a forum in late spring or early summer 1998 to discuss   
the me
ric issue and how we can successfully resolve American concerns. One way   
is to
press for changes to our laws that permit metric only measure on   
packaging.

It is my understanding that anyone who sends an email to Jim McCracken at   
metr
[email protected] will be added to a list to receive an announcement of this   
foru

Reply via email to