Five of the ten "Directors of Legal Metrology” (or their representatives, usually in departments of agriculture) have now sent me links to their respective “current” Laws or Regulations or Rules mandating Unit Pricing.
These Rules apply in Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, or Vermont, respectively. Connecticut, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and DC have yet to send links to their *current* Laws or Regulations, or Rules on Unit Pricing, although these five jurisdictions are also believed to mandate Unit Pricing. Maryland, in particular, mandates Unit Pricing, and *permits* metric or not-metric units in the denominators of Unit Price. On the other hand, Massachusetts and New York , mandate Unit Pricing, but *require* not-metric units in the denominators of Unit Price; such as (per fluid ounce), (per pint), (per quart) or (per gallon)! This malpractice from the 19th Century persists in the present, and hampers value comparisons as noted by John Steele in his study of all 50+ jurisdictions in the United States, as of 2009. "Best Practice" clearly requires units in the denominators of Unit Price, that are related by multiples of ten, for easy comparisons of value by mental arithmetic. Examples: grams or milligrams; liters or milliliters, and meters or millimeters. Mandating units outside the SI (such as fluid ounces, pints, quarts, gallons) *does not* accomplish this service to buyers of consumer commodities and constitutes “Worst Practice” as in the words of John Steele. Eugene Mechtly
