Additional information

As John stated, the new bureaucracy regulating alcohol has indeed been changed 
to the TTB (which somehow stands for Alcohol Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau).   
For several years they have been trying to come up with labeling requirements 
covering such things as serving size, nutritional content, health warnings, 
warnings about wheat content and so many other things that some people feel the 
labels will have to be bigger than the containers.   That along with various 
other conflicting requirements from dozens of other countries has resulted in 
little progress.   The most recent proposal issued for public comment for beer 
I could find was issue 74, issued in 2007.  As far as I can tell (admittedly, 
without doing a lot of research) nothing has happened since then and the option 
of changing to metric labeling has never been considered in any of the 
proposals.  Perhaps someone has found something more recent.  If another 
proposal for public comment is (or has been) issued we should make sure we know 
about it.

Al Lawrence

 





Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 04:19:41 -0700
From: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:45060] Re: A proposal for another step towards metrication
To: [email protected]

That 18.6 fl oz bottle translates to exactly 550 mL, so that may be a standard 
size (or a purposely downsized Imperial pint).
 
Anyway, great observation.  Due to foreign ownership, this would be a good time 
to push for metric measure in the malt beverage industry.
 
I think BATF has changed their name, and is TTB, whatever that stands for.  In 
the last year or two, they were proposing new requirements for nutrition 
labelling on wines, spirits, beer and had a notice of proposed rule making out 
for public comment.  I suggested metric net contents for beer as well as 
several recommendations on the nutrition info.  I don't know where the final 
rule stands.  They have been quiet for a while.
 
There is some background here: 
http://forum.gometric.us/jforum/posts/list/94.page

--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Al Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Al Lawrence <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:45059] A proposal for another step towards metrication
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 7:21 PM




In 1979 and 1980 wine and distilled spirits converted to metric, and, in fact, 
currently only use metric unit labeling, they do not use supplemental units.   
This was not done as a result of pro metric groups or by fiat, it was done 
because the industry requested it.   Beer and malt beverages did not go metric 
because the industry “showed no interest in doing so” according to the BATF.  
Wine and distilled spirits were widely exported at that time, beer was not. 
This is a good example showing that if industry does not actively support a 
metrification proposal it is unlikely anything will happen.

However, things have changed.  Anheuser-Busch is now owned by InBev 
(headquartered in Belgium), Miller brands is owned by a SABMiller, a South 
African company and Coors has merged with Molson (Canadian) and SABMiller also 
has an interest in the new company.   Eight of the top ten selling brands of 
beer in the US
 are made by those companies.   The other two brands in the top ten are 
Heineken (Dutch) and Corona (Mexican).

Malt Beverages in the US are currently labeled in US units only.   They are 
regulated by the BATF, and unlike most other products, no metric units are 
required on the labels and are seldom used.    On a recent trip to a nearby 
supermarket I saw Foster’s cans (Australian) labeled 25.4 fl oz, bottles of 
Stella Artois (Belgium) labeled 11.2 fl oz and Newcastle bottles (British) 
labeled 18.6 fl oz.  The Foster’s was obviously a 750 ml can relabeled for the 
US.   .330 liters is a common glass size in parts of Germany and Belgium, so 
the Stella bottles were probably a standard European size relabeled for the US, 
and the Newcastle bottle was presumably a relabeled Imperial pint, although 
someone was a little off on the math with that one.

I have also seen a lot of half liter bottles
 relabeled as 16.9 fl oz sold at stores that carry a lot of imported beer.
 
If InBev and SABMiller are interested in converting beer sold in the US to 
metric units they would have the power to do it.   Since, unlike 30 years ago, 
a lot of beer is now both imported and exported, the conversion would save 
relabeling costs in both directions.   Package sizes do not have to be changed. 
  The vast majority of beer in the US would still be sold in 12 oz cans and 
bottles, they would just be marked 355 ml instead.  No costs would have to be 
incurred by changing package sizes, there would only be cost savings due to 
fewer label changes and by simplifying inventory control.

All that is required is ruling by BAFT that malt beverages be labeled in 
metric, like wine and distilled spirits.   If InBev, SABMiller and a few other 
companies are interested in this it could be done virtually overnight. 
 What is the position of InBev and SABMiller on this?   What can USMA act as a 
catalyst or intermediary to help accomplish this?  


Alan Lawrence 
 
 


Hotmail® has ever-growing storage! Don’t worry about storage limits. Check it 
out. 
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_BR_life_in_synch_052009

Reply via email to