I heard from the BWMA forum owner (in another forum) that some 45 or so states in the US had passed legislation that will make metric compulsory for consumable goods. It also seemed that he said that USC would no longer be required in these states. I live in the US and I have never heard any such thing! I always thought many states were to conservative to enact such a law. Has anyone else heard about this? or know of something like it?

BWMA forum owner (in another forum) that some 45 or so states in the US had passed legislation that will make metric compulsory for consumable goods. It also seemed that he said that USC would no longer be required in these states. I live in the US and I have never heard any such thing! I always thought many states were to conservative to enact such a law. Has anyone else heard about this? or know of something like it?


metre:
This legislation is enacted to save companies, who export to Europe a lot of money. From 2010 all goods imported into the EU have to show proper metric values only. If America wants to export and it needs to, most of the money so earned would be lost on catering for two systems simultaniously.

That legislation, in fact, is moot because it has been preempeted by federal legislation in most cases.

Re: EU regulations May 3 2004, 7:40 AM


That legislation, in fact, is moot because it has been preempeted by federal legislation in most cases.


metre:
Please explain?
As far as I know legislation to show metric only quantities has to be enacted in all US States for industry to go ahead and conform to European law after 2010. If this does not happen industry has to produce 2 different sets of containers, cans, bags, bottles and so on that, negates all profit made on goods exported to Europe.

metre, we have a federalist system here. The federal government legislates on interstate matters only. Since most companies do business in more than one state, federal legislation is all that really matters much. In fact, for many products the federal government prohibits states from requiring any labelling beyond federal requirements.

All this talk of "federal" is making me eager to vote in a referendum!!

Roth,
Go to this link:
http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/230/235/h130-02/packlab.pdf

Check out 6.1 (this is on page 9 of what you've downloaded, or page 53 of the overall document).

Re: Moot? May 10 2004, 7:17 AM


metre, we have a federalist system here. The federal government legislates on interstate matters only. Since most companies do business in more than one state, federal legislation is all that really matters much. In fact, for many products the federal government prohibits states from requiring any labelling beyond federal requirements.


metre:
I am aware of your federal system. That still requires all States to enact legislation to that effect.

First of all I would like to say thanks for going and finding this article and then posting it so I could go see it.

Second, When I was reading this article i didn't see anything that said than USC was no longer required, I admit i only read 6 or so pages out of the 40 some. But on the 45th page it says
"Nothing contained in this regulation should be construed to supersede any labeling requirement in ferderal law or to require the use of SI units on nonconsumer packages".
This is a quote that i pulled directed from page 45.

IST arcticle May 11 2004, 2:26 PM


First of all I would like to say thanks for going and finding this article and then posting it so I could go see it.

Second, When I was reading this article i didn't see anything that said than USC was no longer required, I admit i only read 6 or so pages out of the 40 some. But on the 45th page it says
"Nothing contained in this regulation should be construed to supersede any labeling requirement in ferderal law or to require the use of SI units on nonconsumer packages".
This is a quote that i pulled directed from page 45.

metre:
Interesting "NONCONSUMER packages". Any idea what that means?

Note the sign...

"Do not feed the...."

Actually, some labelling requirements are controlled by the Federal government, some by the states. Food and drugs are controlled Federally and FPLA applies. Most other consumer goods are controlled by the states. (I'm American and the list confuses me.)

FPLA has required both metric and inch-pound info since 1994, so the requirement of metric info is nothing new. There is a proposal by NIST at the Federal level, to amend FPLA so that metric is still required but inch-pound becomes optional. This is primarily to allow one package in both the US and for export to the EU.

The States have a standards body for the items they control so 50 states don't have 50 labelling requirements (otherwise the Feds would probably take over, citing the Interstate Commerce clause). The list of items they control is odd -- first on the list is aluminum-cored clothesline. As most Americans have dryers, not clotheslines, it is perhaps a metaphor for the whole list. However, some important products are controlled at State, not Federal levels: soaps and shampoos, cosmetics, paints. The States have moved faster, beginning in 1999, to amend their rules, 45 states currently allow metric-only on items they control. Admittedly, most of these products, based on a survey in my home are still dual.

This effort begin around 1997, when the EU had a requirement for metric-only beginning 2000; that date was moved to 2010, causing the Federal government to screech to a halt, although the States proceeded for some reason.

Perhaps, I don't understand how the board software works. My first attempt to post this appeared in the middle of the thread and did not update the thread index.

Actually, some labelling requirements are controlled by the Federal government, some by the states. Food and drugs are controlled Federally and FPLA applies. Most other consumer goods are controlled by the states. (I'm American and the list confuses me.)

FPLA has required both metric and inch-pound info since 1994, so the requirement of metric info is nothing new. There is a proposal by NIST at the Federal level, to amend FPLA so that metric is still required but inch-pound becomes optional. This is primarily to allow one package in both the US and for export to the EU.

The States have a standards body for the items they control so 50 states don't have 50 labelling requirements (otherwise the Feds would probably take over, citing the Interstate Commerce clause). The list of items they control is odd -- first on the list is aluminum-cored clothesline. As most Americans have dryers, not clotheslines, it is perhaps a metaphor for the whole list. However, some important products are controlled at State, not Federal levels: soaps and shampoos, cosmetics, paints. The States have moved faster, beginning in 1999, to amend their rules, 45 states currently allow metric-only on items they control. Admittedly, most of these products, based on a survey in my home are still dual.

This effort begin around 1997, when the EU had a requirement for metric-only beginning 2000; that date was moved to 2010, causing the Federal government to screech to a halt, although the States proceeded for some reason.

http://www.metricmethods.com/UPLR.html
This link provides a good summary including map showing the 45 states which have adopted permissive metric-only, on packaging the states control via UPLR, Uniform Packaging & Labeling Regulation, model regulations developed by the NCWM, National Conference on Weights & Measures.

It also contains the list of products subject to packaging control by the states. The map is as of Fall, 2003, and I have not been able to find additional info on the five "holdout" states, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Alabama, and Hawaii.

Consumer products not on the list fall under FPLA (Federally controlled, which has not yet been amended. If 45 states have adopted it locally, perhaps it will be easy to pass at the Federal level, but who can tell.

Note that NIST provides "expert support" to NCWM and is one of the main proponents of amending FPLA.