"FPLA Rules, 16 CFR Parts 500-503, Project No. 411015" Following is the First Draft of my Comments to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on proposed revisions of FTC Rules under the federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA). My final draft will be submitted to <ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/fairlabelingact>:
"The FPLA is designed to facilitate value comparisons and prevent unfair or deceptive packaging and labeling of consumer commodities…" To complete "value comparisons," the consumer usually needs to apply a hand-held calculator to calculate and compare numerical values of costs of a commodity across packages sizes from a particular brand and with sizes of various packages from other brands, to decide on the best buy. In recent years, postings of "Unit Price” by retailers has relieved the consumer of the burden of numerical calculations for value comparisons. Unit Price is defined as “Price per unit of Measurement” of the commodity being offered for sale in retail marketplaces. According to David Sefcik of NIST (301-975-4868), there are nine State which currently have mandatory Unit Pricing regulations. These nine States are Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont. In the remaining States, Unit Pricing remains voluntary. The FTC and other federal regulatory agencies would do a service to consumers by encouraging, if not requiring, the posting of Unit Prices near or on the shelves of packages, but not directly on the packages themselves, Note that the FPLA require declarations of "net amounts" contained within packages or containers, in dual units of measurement, metric and not-metric (e.g. grams and ounces) but does not even mention or discuss the term “Unit Pricing” nor does the FPLA require or recommend the units of measurement to be used for postings of Unit Prices. Therefore, metric-only postings of Unit Prices are fully compliant with the existing FPLA. For example, "dollars per liter" for bottled water, "cents per milliliter" for eye drops, "dollars per kilogram", and "cents per gram" for dry commodities are aready in harmony with existing labels of Nutrition Facts, and are already in full compliance with the existing FPLA. Furthermore, Public Laws declare that metric units of measurement are preferred for commerce and trade in the United States (i.e. Public Laws 110-69 of 2007, 100-418 of 1988, and 94-168 of 1975 establish the preference for metric units of measurement in the United States.) I request that the FTC incorporate Unit Pricing in to its Rules for the marketing of consumer commodities. With respect to the specific FTC questions; (1) There is a need to promulgate the advantage to consumers of Unit Pricing. (2) There would be some costs of Unit Pricing to retailers but only advantages to consumers. (3) The FTC should modify its Rules to include Unit Pricing for the benefit of consumers. (4) Unit Pricing Rules would further promote the flow of truthful information. (5) There would be costs to retailers. Walmart, for example, already bears these costs. (6) As soon as an amended FPLA permits, metric-only labeling of net amounts should be used. (7) Unknown. (8) Unknown. (9) Concurrence of constant retail price with reduction of package size. (10) Implement Unit Pricing. (11) FDA accepts metric-only Nutrition Facts. FTC requires duality of units of measurement. (12) Unknown. (13) Virtually the entire World of Trade is metric-only with the exception of the the United States. I note that the FTC encourages the submission of comments online. Eugene A. Mechtly
