I'm certainly glad to see that your web search brought up both Jim Frysinger's site and my own site (SI Navigator).
Something's working right. <g> I see Jim has already responded. Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 03:43 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:19506] Re: European Commission > > > > As for the other tidal wave, let's support matters here by writing to > > state weights and measures officers in states that have not adopted > the > > UPLR metric-only permissive" amendment and also federal > representatives > > for a revision to the FPLA. > > I did not know that US businesses are forbidden from using metric-only > by the 'people in blue with guns' as Jim might have put it. I wanted to > learn more so I typed UPLR into a search engine. That came up with the > following websites: > > http://www.metricmethods.com/UPLR_adoption.html > http://metric1.org/frindexm.htm > > That showed status as at 2000 April 27 and some of the states listed > were moving towards adoption of metric only labelling in 2000/2001. Has > progress been made? > > Then I did a search on the NIST website and found their fact sheet on > metric labelling: > > "Metric Only Quantity Declarations are not Permitted in Most Cases" > http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/230/235/metric.htm > > I am now a bit confused. What is the real situation? > -- > Terry Simpson > Human Factors Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.connected-systems.com > Phone: +44 7850 511794 > >
