Sounds like it will be months to a year, yes. But, the department appears to
be moving ahead on it, and Mr. Andersen has been very communicative.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Ezra Steinberg
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: 08 August, 2009 11:52
Subject: [USMA:45553] Re: Fw: UPLR and the metric option
Paul,
Yes, I guess I cansee what Ross is saying. Not sure what "a little while"
means in government time. Maybe by US Thanksgiving? :-)
Ezra
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Trusten
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 2:15 AM
Subject: [USMA:45552] Fw: UPLR and the metric option
Ezra et al.
Here is the latest communication I had with New York's W&M director.
Alabama is an unknown quantity at this point.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Ross Andersen
To: Paul Trusten
Sent: 26 May, 2009 08:37
Subject: RE: UPLR and the metric option
Paul,
The project has been assigned to Counsel and we have been out in the
marketplace surveying potential impact on packagers.
We are moving forward in drafting a proposal. However, because we are
making drastic changes to both the labeling side and methods of sale, I do
think it will be a little while before a proposal gets published.
Ross J Andersen, Director
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Bureau of Weights and Measures
10B Airline Drive
Albany, NY 12235
(518) 457-3146 or FAX (518) 457-5693
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Trusten [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2009 5:16 PM
To: Ross Andersen
Subject: UPLR and the metric option
Dear Mr. Andersen,
What progress, if any, has been made regarding New York State's
consideration of the provisions of NIST Handbook 130, which contains the UPLR
metric-only labeling option?
Sincerely,
Paul Trusten, R.Ph.
Public Relations Director
U.S. Metric Association, Inc.
www.metric.org
3609 Caldera Blvd. Apt. 122
Midland, Texas 79707-2872 US
+1(432)528-7724
[email protected]
