Volume is in ml on the web site of HEB, about as rural Texas as you can
get.







*John Nichols*
Construction Science, College of Architecture | Texas A&M University
ph: 979.845.6541  | [email protected]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tamu.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=L21MSqaK0CnZ5cLpW9nDgS%2F4bLraEemFLrfOKM4m8is%3D&reserved=0*
 
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tamu.edu%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=L21MSqaK0CnZ5cLpW9nDgS%2F4bLraEemFLrfOKM4m8is%3D&amp;reserved=0>



*From:* USMA <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Al Lawrence
*Sent:* Monday, 23 November 2020 4:19 PM
*To:* Mark Henschel <[email protected]>
*Cc:* USMA List Server <[email protected]>
*Subject:* [USMA 1612] Re: The SI and the new administration



If you google "changes to the FPLA" you get various notices* put out by the
FDA*.  One of the typical ones is copied below.  I don't know for sure, but
I don't think Congress had to vote to eliminate the use of the terms "cents
off", "economy size", etc.





The Federal Trade Commission has amended its rules under the Fair Packaging
and Labeling Act
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Fnam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Fwww.ftc.gov*2Fenforcement*2Frules*2Frulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings*2Ffair-packaging-labeling-act%26data%3D04*7C01*7Cusma*40lists.colostate.edu*7C895f373ae287463e4cff08d88ffdd2c3*7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b*7C0*7C0*7C637417667632241660*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000%26sdata%3DSgWKb6j*2B6xicBk5W*2Bkl*2FcPBiU1l74K4cOnomb2Je0ZY*3D%26reserved%3D0__%3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQpqy25aQ%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=MgWmKcpYP40qtavpkgawk28qkeHSGeoqXv0O9mOJBjg%3D&amp;reserved=0>
(FPLA),
which requires that certain products carry labels identifying the contents,
source, item quantity, and other information to help consumers compare
products.

In February 2015, the FTC sought public comment on proposed amendments. In
response to comments received, the Commission adopted all proposed
amendments, including modernizing the place-of-business listing requirement
to incorporate online resources, eliminating obsolete references to
commodities advertised using the terms “cents off,” “introductory offer”
and “economy size,”  and incorporating a more comprehensive metric chart.

Product categories exempt from FTC regulations under the FPLA are meat
products, poultry, tobacco products, items under the Food and Drug
Administration’s jurisdiction, alcoholic beverages, commodities subject to
the Federal Seed Act, and any commodity subject to packaging or labeling
requirements imposed under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act, or certain provisions of the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act. In
addition, the notice specifically lists numerous products that are not
subject to the FPLA.

The Commission vote approving the amendments was 4-0. The amended FPLA
regulations
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Fnam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Fwww.ftc.gov*2Fpolicy*2Ffederal-register-notices*2F16-cfr-parts-550-502-rules-regulations-statements-general-policy-or%26data%3D04*7C01*7Cusma*40lists.colostate.edu*7C895f373ae287463e4cff08d88ffdd2c3*7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b*7C0*7C0*7C637417667632251653*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000%26sdata%3D0JZP0WqZ*2BLK2Xyp6v7GmzyqV0vRW0XiTp*2Fgh89dn5gA*3D%26reserved%3D0__%3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQDKUBLgc%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=8EcITrK%2Fxlc97XP3RurRfNyMOw4jSYYXFrFtDi8QnN4%3D&amp;reserved=0>
are
available on the FTC’s website and will be published in the Federal
Register shortly.





Al Lawrence




------------------------------

*From:* Mark Henschel <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Monday, November 23, 2020 2:06 PM
*To:* Al Lawrence <[email protected]>
*Cc:* Brian White <[email protected]>; USMA List Server <
[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [USMA 1606] Re: The SI and the new administration



What we are asking here in the FPLA update would be a metric only option.
No company would be required by law to label consumer products in
metric-only labels.

Present law requires inch pound unit labeling even when the product being
labeled was designed and manufactured in metric units. Thus two-liter soda
pop bottles are required to be labeled in ounces or quarts even though the
size of the container is clearly metric.

Thus if companies want to label in inch pound and SI they can, but if they
want to only use the metric size on the label,  they would be free to do so.

Again, this metric only designation is illegal under present law, and I do
not see how to fix it without Congress getting involved.

Mark Henschel



On Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 3:29 PM Al Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:

Mark,



You may be right, I do not know, which is why I asked, but there have been
many revisions to the FPLA since 1992.  There are many changes made by
other regulatory agencies every year.  If changes to the FPLA have to be
approved by Congress, it is probably a regular rubber stamp procedure.  I
am sure Congress does not individually review every change that every
regulatory agency makes, every labelling or ingredients change, every fill
rule, every decision on tamper-proof caps and so on, they leave that to the
regulatory agency.



I don't think NIST can change any rules, it is advisory, sets standards and
so on.



It would be nice if someone knows for sure.







Al Lawrence




------------------------------

*From:* Mark Henschel <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Monday, November 23, 2020 1:07 PM
*To:* Al Lawrence <[email protected]>
*Cc:* Brian White <[email protected]>; USMA List Server <
[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [USMA 1606] Re: The SI and the new administration



Al:

With all due respect,  I think you are wrong on the facts. Any federal
agency on it's own does not have the power to change a law passed by
Congress and signed into law by the President.

If changing the FPLA were this easy, NIST would have done this a long time
ago.

The last time the FPLA was updated was in 1992, as a stand alone law.

I am willing to be corrected in this procedure,  but my understanding of
the Constitution is that an agency which has the responsibility of abiding
by legislation does not have the power to alter that legislation.

Mark Henschel



On Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 2:05 PM Al Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:

The general feeling of the group is that getting the government to enact
the metric only labelling option as a revision or amendment to the FPLA is
important.  The FLPA can be changed by submitting a petition to them for
the change, as has already been done by NIST.  Any organization or
individual can submit a proposal, the agency looks at it, and, if they feel
it is a good idea, must submit it for public comment as a proposed
revision, and after public comment, can then decide whether or not to enact
it.



It is my understanding that if the petition is approved, it becomes law and
goes into the Federal Register.  I do not believe Congress has to do
anything.  Can anyone confirm that is correct?



It has also been suggested that the NIST proposal be submitted to
Congressional committee.  That would be another way to make the metric only
option law, but it would have to go through committee, be approved, and
then be passed by both the Senate and House.



Trying to get Congress to pass the metric option as a law would be
extremely difficult.  Submitting a petition to the FPLA has a better chance
to succeed, but will still likely take years.  At least NIST submitted
their petition some time ago.  Another problem is that it is even more
difficult to influence a regulatory agency than a Congressman.  Even a
Congressman would likely have little influence over them.



No Congressman will publicly support moving towards SI, even if they do
personally, so that would make the possibility of a stand-alone law being
passed extremely remote,  but if we can find one or two that personally
support the idea, it might possible that they could get the FDA to move the
NIST proposal along a little quicker.  Maybe there are dozens of
Congressmen who are in favor of it who could quietly push the FDA.  A
desperate hope, but I do not see anything else we can do.  Maybe the USMA
could find out how many privately support the idea.



And don't forget about the similar petition submitted to the TTB.  If the
goal is to get the general public used to SI, selling beer in metric units
would be a really good way to do it.



Al Lawrence




------------------------------

*From:* USMA <[email protected]> on behalf of Mark Henschel <
[email protected]>
*Sent:* Monday, November 23, 2020 9:40 AM
*To:* Brian White <[email protected]>
*Cc:* USMA List Server <[email protected]>
*Subject:* [USMA 1606] Re: The SI and the new administration



Guys:

Metrication has never been a top priority. There are always other things
more important. This was even true back in 1975 when the MEtric Conversion
Act went through Congress. I remember when the economy was good, and people
said "We can't go metric not, the economy is doing great." Then when the
economy was bad, people said "We can't go metric now, the economy is
terrible."

There will always be other priorities. We CAN do some things, and one of
them is the FPLA update. Changing math education is essential, since the
kids in school today will be the politicians of tomorrow. And maybe fixing
the Post Office could involve metrication. But never give up, simply
because other things are also pressing issues at the same time.

MArk HEnschel



On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 7:48 AM Brian White <[email protected]> wrote:

Exxxxactly...



On Nov 23, 2020, at 05:11, Ressel, Howard R (DOT) <[email protected]>
wrote:



Sadly with so much disagreement about so many things right now metric is
not a top priority. No need to give up just keep pushing on the grass roots
level.



Howard



*From:* USMA <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Ezra
Steinberg
*Sent:* Sunday, November 22, 2020 11:12 PM
*To:* Brian White <[email protected]>
*Cc:* USMA List Server <[email protected]>
*Subject:* [USMA 1602] Re: The SI and the new administration



*ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open
attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails.*



Time to just give up, i guess.

🙄



On Sun, Nov 22, 2020, 8:06 PM Brian White <[email protected]> wrote:

If it's that easy, why wasn't it done 10 years ago, or 25, or 40?



Won't happen.  And if it's brought up, then it's an "us vs them" political
fight which actually then sets us back.



On Nov 22, 2020, at 19:46, Ezra Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote:



The good news is that Bill Nye (The Science Guy) hosted Senator Chuck
Schumer of NY the other day to talk about the need to move aggressively to
address the climate crisis, which Schumer wholeheartedly agreed with.



At one point during the interview Nye implied how we finally need in the
USA to convert to metric by making a slightly snide remark about how
archaic Fahrenheit was, which gave me the strong impression he favors
metrication. (He may have even been more explicit in other appearances he
has made on TV over the years, which would not surprise me.)



So, if both Senate races in Georgia go to the Democrats, Schumer becomes
Majority Leader. At that point we can contact Nye to see if he can prevail
on Schumer to get legislation passed to at least allow metric only labels
on products and maybe pass other measures to start easing the USA into
metric.



Ezra





On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:06 AM Robert Price <[email protected]> wrote:

Sad to say, but I agree.  Obama wasn't too warm to metric and I don't see
why his former vice president will be any different.





On Thursday, November 19, 2020, 9:30:56 PM CST, Brian White <
[email protected]> wrote:





Not a chance anything will change.  Sad to say but true.



On Nov 19, 2020, at 19:04, J McClellan <[email protected]> wrote:



So is anyone here at all even a bit more hopeful that there might be some
forward metric movement in the US with a new (purportedly more progressive)
administration?

I've already got a letter ready to send out on the 26th of January :P

Hope everybody here does the same!!





GO METRIC, AMERICA!

*Because the kings' foot STINKS.*




_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQ-kM0GkY%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ZIGaA7CVMOiHt%2BZqo917XL9sWESrHeKaaTIGdmwCbA8%3D&amp;reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQ-kM0GkY%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ZIGaA7CVMOiHt%2BZqo917XL9sWESrHeKaaTIGdmwCbA8%3D&amp;reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQ-kM0GkY%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ZIGaA7CVMOiHt%2BZqo917XL9sWESrHeKaaTIGdmwCbA8%3D&amp;reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQ-kM0GkY%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ZIGaA7CVMOiHt%2BZqo917XL9sWESrHeKaaTIGdmwCbA8%3D&amp;reserved=0>

_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!U6_iD1vsy49CUrVPQDtpyh7v0t5MLopR8OCGVLrWh5gErInztephCqH6lvfQ-kM0GkY%24&amp;data=04%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7C4338326cb91c440e341308d88ffeca25%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637417671778508850%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=ZIGaA7CVMOiHt%2BZqo917XL9sWESrHeKaaTIGdmwCbA8%3D&amp;reserved=0>
_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma

Reply via email to