Yet again, the *only* "To:" adressees were Michelle Oneill, and Ann Ngo of the ITA. All others were by Cc.
---- Original message ---- >Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 14:31:56 -0500 (CDT) >From: <[email protected]> >Subject: [USMA:45099] Directive 2009/3/EC >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >Cc: [email protected], [email protected], >[email protected], [email protected] > >The fluid ounce, pint, quart, and gallon (listed in Chapter III of Directive >80/181/EEC of the European Union) have not been "legal units" throughout the >EU since 1994. Directive 2009/3/EC (published on May 7) makes them acceptable >as "supplementary indications" (but not as "legal units") after 2009 December >31. > >Article 3, Paragraph 4 of Directive 80/181/EEC (not abrogated by Directive >2009/3/EC) states that "The indication expressed in a unit of measurement >listed in Chapter I shall predominate..." Therefore, the fluid ounce, pint, >quart, and gallon may not "predominate" over the metric units listed in >Chapter I. > >Many existing labels and documentations of consumer commodities packaged in >the United States, declare "supplementary indications" in first place, and >"legal units" in second place less predominately than the "supplementary >indications." > >What assurance is there that officials in the EU will not reject labels and >documentations that fail to allow "legal units" to predominate in first place >over "supplementary indications" in second place, after 2009 December 31? > >Furthermore, the fluid ounce, pint, quart, and gallon are defined in Chapter >III (of 80/181) by UK definitions, not by US definitions. What assurance is >there that EU officials will not reject exports from the US that fail to use >the definitions in Chapter III? How are consumers protected from confusion >and deception if both EU and US definitions are tolerated? > >Eugene A. Mechtly, Retiree >Advocate of SI and Consumer Protection >________________ >FPLA-5-21.pdf (293k bytes)
