Welcome, Victor! Nice to have you aboard.

I think the next big step here in the States for metrication will come from the 
appearance of many products sporting metric-only labeling. This will happen 
when 
the revised UPLR is adopted by the last 2 states (New York and Alabama) and 
when 
the FPLA is amended to allow metric-only labeling.

How advertising and shelf labels will be affected remains to be seen. I suspect 
that in most stores the shelf labels will show metric only if the product has 
only metric on its label. But the change-over will be gradual unless a new 
Democratic administration and Congress decide that new investments in 
infrastructure, green technologies, etc. 

We'll just have to wait and see ...

Ezra


 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Victor Jockin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi, I'm Victor, a new USMA member.  Anyone have a sense of whether this 
> concession by the EU is likely to succeed in pressuring the US to allow 
> optional metric-only labels?  Or is opposition from food retailers 
> impossible to overcome?
> 
> If that measure passes in the US, it seems to me like it would be one of the 
> most important breakthroughs in the history of metrication in this country. 
> The story would likely not make the news, and consumers would not notice 
> much right away.  But I could see metric-only labels slowly increasing in 
> use over a period of years, and eventually, perhaps, a tipping point would 
> be reached.  To me, that tipping point could be when supermarkets start to 
> adopt metric units on their unit price-comparison shelf labels, which would 
> go a long way toward getting the public to think in terms of liters and 
> grams.  Right now, at least at my local market (Von's in the LA area), they 
> use traditional units on shelf labels even for wine, which is all metric on 
> the bottle.
> 
> Victor Jockin
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Norman & Nancy Werling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> Sent: 02/21/2008 11:53 AM
> Subject: [USMA:40474] Re: EU Metric Directive
> 
> 
> > Gene & USMA members,
> >
> > It is no surprise that the USA and, to a lesser extent, the UK and Ireland 
> > are certainly the "culprits" requiring, or at the very least,causing the 
> > accommodations shown on page 6/7 of the EC's web link.
> >
> > Norm Werling
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 12:14
> > Subject: [USMA:40472] EU Metric Directive
> >
> >
> >>>   EU Metric Directive (80/181/EEC) Status:
> >>>
> >>>   In September 2007, the EC published a proposal to
> >>>   modify the Metric Directive to indefinitely allow
> >>>   industry to use supplementary units along with
> >>>   metric units.  On November 29, 2007, the European
> >>>   Parliament voted in favor of the European
> >>>   Commission's proposed amendments to the EU Metric
> >>>   Directive (which includes an indefinite extension to
> >>>   supplementary indications,
> >>>
> >>> 
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A6-20
> 07-0430+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN).
> >>>    I understand that the Council has to vote next,...
> >>
> >>>   Whether or not this latest proposal will be adopted
> >>>   is still uncertain,...
> >>
> >>> Additional resources can be found at:
> >>> ec.europa.eu/enterprise/prepack/unitmeas/uni_ms_en.htm
> >>> ...
> >>> contact Ms. Ann Ngo, Office of
> >>>   the European Union, Market Access & Compliance/ITA,
> >>>   U.S. Department of Commerce (see below), who is the
> >>>   DoC-EU Metric Directive point of contact.  Ms. Ngo
> >>>   maintains an email list and periodically distributes
> >>>   EU Metric Directive/FPLA updates.
> >>
> >>>   Ann Ngo
> >>>   Office of the European Union
> >>>   Market Access & Compliance
> >>>   International Trade Administration
> >>>   U.S. Department of Commerce
> >>>   (202) 482-0010
> >>>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >> Elizabeth Gentry provided the above information, which I have edited to 
> >> delete lines of less relevance to the USMA.
> >>
> >> Gene.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > 
> 

Reply via email to