But as I understand FMI's position, they do not want to be singled out with the
"burden" (from their perspective) of needing to handle a mix of products, some
of which are labeled metric-only and others which are not.
My point is that their position is likely to be rooted in concerns and
perspective that are not highly amenable to an assertion that American
consumers will be OK with this. It sounds like their concerns are based on how
this could affect the way their members have to conduct their business
internally.
Bottom line is that I suspect it will take additional methods of persuasion to
(at least) neutralize objections on the part of FMI. (But, hey, if I'm wrong,
we get to pop the champagne corks even quicker! :-)
Ezra
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Trusten
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 8:16 PM
Subject: [USMA:43581] Re: Calling all Alabamans for the UPLR metric labeling
option!
Jerry: we cannot tolerate any opposing W&M departments on the metric-only
option. Sure, 48 states and all territories make a strong case, but since we
are dealing with the Nation's measurement standard, we must have the support of
all jurisdictions to make our case for metric iron-clad.
Ezra: No, not eliminating the need for amending the FPLA, but "moot" in the
sense of "no-brainer" when it comes to pushing for the introduction of the FPLA
amendment in Congress. FMI argues that the American people do not understand
metric. However, if there is no opposition among U.S. jurisdictions to having
metric units stand alone, then the case for making the national consumer
regulations allow it is very powerful. It suggests that, according to all the
jurisdictions, that American consumers living in all jurisdictions will
understand metric.
----- Original Message -----
From: [email protected]
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: 08 March, 2009 22:07
Subject: [USMA:43579] Re: Calling all Alabamans for the UPLR metric
labeling option!
Paul,
Why would unanimous adoption of item 11.33 of the UPLR render amending the
FPLA moot?
It seems like the FPLA regulations would still be controlling for all goods
under its scope.
Ezra
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Trusten" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 8, 2009 7:35:03 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: [USMA:43576] Calling all Alabamans for the UPLR metric labeling
option!
In 1999, the National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM) amended its
model regulation, the Uniform Packaging and Labeling Regulation (UPLR), to
contain the following:
11.33. Inch-Pound Units, Exemptions - Consumer Commodities. – The
requirements for statements of quantity in inch-pound units shall not apply to
packages that bear appropriate SI units. This exemption does not apply to
foods, drugs, or cosmetics or to packages subject to regulation by the Federal
Trade Commission, meat and poultry products subject to the Federal Meat or
Poultry Products Inspection Acts, and tobacco or tobacco products.
Since this amendment was added to the UPLR, the governments of 48 states
and all U.S. territories have incorporated it into their own regulations. Only
New York and Alabama have not done so, and it has been strongly suggested to me
that New York State will soon become the 49th state to adopt it. That leaves
only Alabama, which could demonstrate considerable resistance to this simple
option: an option for manufacturers to drop the customary units from the
labeling of products not regulated by the federal Fair Packaging and Labeling
Act (FPLA). In other words, this is a "mirror" version our proposed FPLA
amendment for the metric-only option, at the state or territorial level.
Accordingly, I ask this list: do you know any Alabamans who are strong
supporters of U.S. metrication? If so, don't have them write to Alabama
officials in support of this UPLR amendment just yet! If they are
Internet-proficient, please--tell them about this Listserver and ask them to
subscribe (subscription is free; for instructions on how to subscribe, see
http://www.metric.org/listserv.htm). I think it useful for them to talk here
about what they know about the attitudes about metric in Alabama. We need to
cultivate support of Alabama citizens for this measure, and I think it would be
useful to collect some voices here, and raise their awareness and enthusiasm.
Why is this potentially so important? If we can get unanimous agreement of
the 55 several U.S. weights-and-measures jurisdictions that metric units are
allowed to stand alone on U.S. consumer packaging, debate over the FPLA
(federal) equivalent of this becomes almost moot. In fact, a unanimous roll
call on UPLR may represent the most significant advance in U.S. metrication
since the 1988 amendment to the Metric Conversion Act of 1975, because then,
with unanimity on UPLR, metric units will be deemed both legally preferred and
intrinsically legitimate in U.S. commerce.
Try forwarding this post to interested Alabamans. From here, we'll give out
addresses to which they should write if they want to express support.
Thank you very much for your assistance.
SI-incerely,
Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Public Relations Director
U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
www.metric.org
3609 Caldera Blvd. Apt. 122
Midland TX 79707-2872 US
+1(432)528-7724
[email protected]
