Hi James and everyone: After reading the site: http://www.nist.gov/pml/wmd/metric/pricing-laws.cfm-I understood NY State to keep consistent in not only packaging but transportation, following Handbook 130-2013 as far as requireing dual labeling and dual unit defination in transport and highway. And as far as stores have a choice to voluntarily provide unit pricing information. What bothers me is California Weight and Measures Law and grandfathered clause which allows the Dairy industry to not sell dairy products in SI measure but only in pints, quarts and gallons and exempted from UPLR and NIST Handbook 130.
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, James Frysinger <[email protected]>wrote: > It's not quite as simple as that, Ed. > > There are three categories of labeling in the retail market place: > 1. Those regulated by the federal government -- FPLA, FDA regulations, > USDA regulations, etc. > 2. Those ignored by the federal government but regulated by the various > states and territories -- set by those governments and generally following > the recommendations of the Uniform Packaging and Labeling Regulation (UPLR) > put forth by the National Conference on Weights and Measures (NCWM). > 3. Everything else -- no regulations (2 scoops of raisins). > > The FPLA pertains to the first category. The issue on this thread relates > to the second category. NY state is now, apparently, the last holdout on > adopting or adapting the 2000 version of the UPLR. > > Jim > > > -- > James R. Frysinger > 632 Stony Point Mountain Road > Doyle, TN 38559-3030 > > (C) 931.212.0267 > (H) 931.657.3107 > (F) 931.657.3108 > > > On 2013-01-19 12:43, Edward Schlesinger wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 12:17 PM, <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I do hope the amendment will be presented to congress. The FPLA I >> believe has mostly been the same since 1994. It's time for it to be >> updated. >> >> >> ------------------------------**------------------------------** >> ------------ >> *From: * mechtly, eugene a <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>**; >> *To: * U.S. Metric Association <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>>; >> *Subject: * [USMA:52197] SI-Only Labeling >> *Sent: * Fri, Jan 18, 2013 5:45:03 PM >> >> >> I just learned from an employee at NIST that: >> >> 1. The State of New York is the single only remaining state that >> does not permit SI-only labeling. >> You may recall that Alabama *was* the second to last state to permit >> SI-only labeling. >> >> 2. NIST is still *actively* promoting revision of the FPLA to >> *permit* SI-only labeling on consumer products regulated by Federal >> Laws as opposed to products regulated only by state laws. >> >> Eugene Mechtly >> >> >> Hi all! >> The matter of FPLA update is important and I think NY State follows >> Federal Law on labeling and packaging. >> >> -- >> Sincerely, >> Edward B. >> > > -- Sincerely, Edward B.
