Use Skype To Contact Your Norland Rep!

In today's economy people are looking for ways to save more money and operate more efficient. Most Norland International staff have a Skype account where you can call them computer to computer for free. Call from anywhere in the world for free! Email your Norland rep today to get their Skype username! If you don't have a Skype account please CLICK HERE to sign up for a Skype account today. Please message nick-norland with any questions.

IBWA SUPPORTS A STRONG AND VIABLE PUBLIC WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

The International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) today) would like to express support for the maintenance and improvement of a strong, viable U.S. water infrastructure system. Our nation’s water supply and waste water systems are in need of improvements due to the aging infrastructure. However, in a letter to members of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s subcommittee on Water Resources and the Environment, IBWA’s stated its objections to proposed new taxes on bottled water. The Subcommittee is holding a hearing today on HR 3202, the Water Protection and Reinvestment Act, that seeks improve infrastructure by imposing new taxes on water-based beverages, produced disposed into wastewater, pharmaceuticals and corporate profits. .

IBWA President and CEO Joe Doss noted: “IBWA opposes singling out and imposing a tax on water-based beverages. Like all other commercial users, water bottlers pay a pre-determined rate for the use of that municipal water. It is unfair and inequitable to single out water-based beverages, including bottled water, from a myriad of other food and non-food industries and manufacturers in the U.S. that use municipal water. It fails to address the totality of the water infrastructure challenges. Broad-based funding is essential to provide a sustainable source of revenue to improve our aging water infrastructure.”

“IBWA members recognize that they, along with other commercial, residential, industrial, and agricultural users, must do their part to fund necessary improvements and expansion to our nation’s infrastructure. However, primary responsibility for such maintenance and improvement belongs to water utilities, which should be self-sustaining through rates that treat all users equitably,” Mr. Doss noted.

The beverage industry, which includes bottled water, uses minimal amounts of water to efficiently produce important consumer products. Even if we assumed that all water used in beverages comes from public water supplies, the total amount would be approximately 1/3 of one percent of all public water usage. In fact, the majority of bottled water is produced from self supplied groundwater sources.

According to a 2005 study by the Drinking Water Research Foundation (DWRF), annual bottled water production accounts for less than 2/100 of one percent (0.02%) of the total groundwater withdrawn in the United States each year, which is the water source for the vast majority of the United States bottled water production. Additionally, based on information gathered in the DWRF study, in 2001, 87% of the water withdrawn by bottled water companies, on average, was actually bottled for consumption by humans. Thus, bottling water is a very efficient process.

“Bottled water fulfills a critical need for citizens and first responders immediately following a natural disaster or other catastrophic event. Bottled water companies also work with municipal water systems to provide the public with clean, safe bottled water when the public drinking water infrastructure is compromised or when the water does not meet state and federal health standards. To tax bottled water for water infrastructure needs is counterproductive,” Mr. Doss stated.

The article was provided courtesy of the IBWA

Environmental Working Group’s New Report on Bottled Water Labels Fails

A report on bottled water labeling released at a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on July 8, 2009 submitted by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) did not make any claim of violations of FDA labeling requirements. According to Joe Doss, the International Bottled Water Association’s (IBWA) President and CEO, who testified at the hearing, “Consumers can continue to have a high confidence in bottled water’s safety and quality. There is nothing in this brief report that points to any improper labeling by water bottlers. The EWG report criticizes the FDA for allowing the term ‘purified’ water, considering it ‘ambiguous,’ but the term is an official classification that meets the strict U.S. Pharmacopeia (23rd revision) standard.” Doss continued, “The report amounts to a special interest group’s wish list of what they want to impose on bottled water but not what the law reflects.”

IBWA supports a consumer’s right to clear, accurate, and comprehensive information about the bottled water products he or she purchase. All packaged foods and beverages, including bottled water, are subject to extensive FDA labeling requirements that provide consumers with a great deal of product quality information. In addition, virtually all bottled water products include a phone number on the label that consumers can use to contact the company.

In fact, IBWA has petitioned FDA to require all bottled water labels to include a phone number. IBWA believes that the most feasible way for consumers to obtain information not already on the label is through a request to the bottler. In addition, consumers can go to the IBWA website to obtain contact information or water quality information for all IBWA member brands.

Federal law requires FDA bottled water regulations to be as protective of the public health as EPA standards for public drinking water systems. And to that end, FDA has established bottled water standards of quality for more than 90 substances. Most FDA bottled water quality standards are the same as EPA’s maximum contaminant levels for public water systems. The few differences in regulated substances are because they are not found in bottled water or they are regulated under another provision of law (such as FDA’s food additives program).

If a container of bottled water has a contaminant that exceeds an FDA standard, that fact must be disclosed on the label. Failure of a bottled water container to meet the standards of quality and to be properly labeled can subject it to recall by the company, removal from the market by FDA, and criminal penalties, including fines. If a bottled water product’s source is a public water system and the finished bottled water product does not meet the FDA Standard of Identity for “purified” or “sterile” water, the product label must disclose the public water system source.
Consumers have many options when choosing which bottled water brand to drink. If a bottled water company does not provide the information that a consumer requests, he or she can choose another brand. That is not the case with tap water. Consumers cannot choose which public water system is piped into their homes. And that is the fundamental issue: consumer choice.

Contact: Tom Lauria, Vice President of Communications, IBWA – 703-647-4609.

Native American Water Association

Come see Norland International Sales Executives Chris McCormack and Nick Wieseler at the 14th annual Native American Water Association. Chris and Nick will exhibiting at the show July 15-16th 9-5 pm. We'll see you there!

Town welcomes bottled water plant

This town is ready to take flak from opponents of bottled water in the name of reviving its economy, says Smiths Falls's top administrator.

Wayne Brown, the town's chief administrative officer, made the comments in the wake of criticism from the Council of Canadians, which is questioning the choice of a bottled water firm to move into the vacant Hershey chocolate factory.

"Smiths Falls is a very resilient town and we will not only survive, we will thrive," said Brown.

The town, which has suffered a severe economic battering in recent years, has been the subject of "ghost town" predictions in the past with its economic misfortunes, said Brown.

And the recent news that Aquablue Spring Water International plans to set up a bottled water operation at the Hershey site shows how Smiths Falls will bounce back again, he said.

If some people object to the idea of bottled water being manufactured here, town officials are "prepared to take flak over it," added Brown.

Aquablue Spring Water International, a British Columbia-based subsidiary of Aquablue International Inc., a manufacturer of bottled water for domestic and export markets, officially announced on Monday it has agreed with Hershey Canada "to terms on the acquisition of the facility and equipment located in Smiths Falls," according to a statement on the firm's web-site.

This article is courtesy of:

http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1597889

Walmart joins GreenerPackage.com in new product database

Walmart Stores, Inc. and its Packaging Scorecard software provider ECRM have tapped GreenerPackage.com to serve as the entry point for packaging material suppliers wishing to add their sustainable product data for use in Walmart’s Packaging Scorecard Modeling software. Upon launch of the Greener Package Database, product information submitted to the site will not only be available to GreenerPackage.com visitors, but it will also feed ECRM’s MarketGate™ application suite, maintained for Walmart’s private use with its modeling software.

Related sponsored links*
White paper: Significant years for Ingeo natural plastic bottles made from plants, not oil
White paper: Sustainable packaging suppliers: Where is your next lead coming from?In the following exclusive interview with GreenerPackage.com managing editor Anne Marie Mohan, Sam’s Club director of packaging Amy Zettlemoyer-Lazar discusses the agreement and the new Greener Package Database in more depth.

GP: Why did Walmart decide to ask ECRM to merge its database with Greener Package?
AZL: ECRM initially created MarketGate as a virtual trade show to support our Sustainable Packaging Expo by housing the packaging suppliers’ sustainability information. Greener Package has a broad audience of packaging professionals who may find this information useful, and therefore, merging the two seemed like a good fit of information and an audience.

GP: What are the benefits of this database to packaging suppliers?
AZL: With the Greener Package Database, packaging suppliers will have one place to post their company information, and it establishes a uniform way to talk about their packaging materials, their components, and any environmental claims associated with both.

GP: What are the benefits of this database to your product suppliers, i.e., consumer packaged goods companies?
AZL: CPG companies can use the database as a source to find more sustainable materials and packages, which ultimately provides our customers and members with more choices. Walmart Stores, Inc. holds an annual Sustainable Packaging Expo in Rogers, Arkansas, and this database allows suppliers who can’t travel to the exposition access to the same information year-round. Because it doesn’t require travel, the virtual trade show also provides an opportunity for us as a company to provide low-cost innovation.

GP: Can you explain how the data in the Greener Package Database will link to the Walmart Packaging Scorecard Modeling software?
AZL: The modeling software is currently used to compare packages for multiple environmental metrics. When the user makes material selections for comparison within the software, the product information is visible. So the system provides suggestions for packaging suppliers that can help improve their modeling score. For those product suppliers that are interested, when they compare their packages, they have a direct link to those packaging suppliers who can help them make that improvement.

For Walmart, it’s really important right now to push better packaging and more sustainable choices because Americans are being very thoughtful about the purchases they make. It’s really important to make sure that we are continuing to drive waste and inefficiencies out of the business, which is why more sustainable packaging plays a good role in that goal for us as a company.

At Walmart, efficiencies and sustainability go hand-in-hand. So our motto is really “Save money. Live better.” At Walmart, we are providing value through our products, and that value translates into quality and more sustainable products and more sustainable packaging. So we are driving more efficient products and more efficient packaging, and making better material selections, and that has a direct link into more choices and better-value products for our customers and members.

GP: The Greener Package Database will provide suppliers with the opportunity to have their product claims reviewed by a third party. Can you explain why this is important?
AZL: The Document Review process will verify that the information that the packaging supplier is sharing is being reported using industry-standard terminology, making sure that claims are being made in a similar manner across multiple suppliers. So when a CPG company looks at the site, they understand what’s being claimed, and there is no confusion between the way one supplier may make that claim versus another supplier making that claim. It’s important to verify what statements are being made or what claims are being made and how they could be interpreted by the CPG customer or a retailer. Then ultimately, those claims can be passed on to our customers or members. So we want to make sure that at the start they are accurate.

GP: Can you talk about the how the Document Review process will address greenwashing and bogus claims by suppliers?
AZL: We found that some of the guidelines out there may be confusing to packaging suppliers. There is potential for misunderstanding that the Federal Trade Commission Green Guides pertain to all marketing claims. They are not only marketing claims to the consumers paying for a product that’s in a package, but they are also meant for business-to-business marketing claims.

And so, the Document Review process will ensure that when the product supplier makes an environmental claim, they have done the tests to back that claim up. Or, that they can prove that the material is being recycled as per the FTC guidelines. There has been a lot of confusion in this space in the last couple of years, and it has the potential to lead to greenwashing. Greenwashing is a concern because we really want to make sure that we are communicating accurate information to our customers and members, and we want to be sure that they have better information to make better purchasing decisions.

In general, we are basing the Document Review on the FTC Green Guides and strict interpretation of those guidelines.

GP: Can you give some examples of how claims of biodegradability or recyclability might be reviewed?
AZL: Sure! The claim of compostability would actually need to have a test report from a lab stating that it has actually been tested and meets the requirements of the testing outlined in ASTM D6400 or D6868 pending the material. For recyclability, that would be based on the package type.

Some things in order to be claimed for recyclability must be able to be recycled or collected in a significant majority of municipalities. That doesn’t mean that it’s capable of mechanically being recycled. So that’s where there has been a big difference. If a supplier is making a claim that their package is recyclable, then they must talk about the actual packaging components that are being collected. There are several studies and reports that show what is being collected across the United States that are going to be used to verify that claim.

So suppliers need to talk in detail if they are using a PET bottle. Does it use color or not? If it’s glass, what type of glass is it? Based on the packaging components and the FTC guidelines and several reports, a decision will be made whether that really meets being able to be collected in a significant majority of municipalities.

GP: Do you know what a significant majority is?
AZL: I have heard some numbers, but it would need to be above 51% and around 60%. But that is not outlined, to my knowledge, in the FTC guidelines.

GP: Originally the Greener Package Database was going to focus on questions pertaining more to the environmental impact of a product, but the merger with ECRM brings far more data points with extensive performance data. Can you explain what the benefits are of having one database for both performance and environmental data?
AZL: The benefit is that suppliers don’t make decisions based on one or the other. If you have a packaging material or a packaging component that is more sustainable but doesn’t perform, then it really doesn’t meet all the requirements of the marketplace. It’s very similar to when our customers and members come to Walmart and Sam’s Club; they are looking for a more sustainable product that meets all of their expectations in performance. So it’s important to have both together because decisions cannot be made on one area without considering the other. Walmart is recommending that when you look at performance data, you also look at environmental areas of the product and vice versa.

GP: What is the benefit to suppliers who pay to have their data reviewed? How will it affect how their data is displayed in the database?
AZ: Packaging suppliers who pay the fee to have their data go through the Document Review process will have the benefit of having it clearly identified in the database that they have gone through the review process and that their packaging material or packaging component meets the requirements to make all the claims. Whereas, if the supplier does not go through the audit, it will be clearly identified in the database that they have not provided documents to prove this claim. It doesn’t mean that the packaging does not meet the claim, but that those claims haven’t been verified. And so it will be clearly identified if the product has been reviewed or not reviewed in the database.

As a result, after August 1, 2009, the modeling software will not show a link to any packaging suppliers that have not gone through the Document Review process.

GP: I would think that the Document Review process is something that packaging suppliers would almost need to have done anyway if they are going to be selling their products based on environmental benefits. What are your thoughts?
AZL: The Document Review helps to substantiate their claims and helps to give them credibility. I think it will be a benefit to those packaging suppliers in that they won’t have to worry about establishing credibility with every product supplier that they are trying to sell to. They will have been able to do it once in the database and can refer to that Document Review to show that they have provided the compostability claims or the recyclability claims, and that it has been reviewed by a third party. Instead of every one of their customers having to verify that information, they can double-check on the Web site themselves and feel confident on the level of Document Review.

It’s also due diligence to make sure that the application the CPG is selecting meets the requirements, but it is a nice first pass to make sure that it is by starting with the verification. Definitely every package is customized for the product and for the customer. So it’s important that after that customization, any claims that they are making on the label are also verified.

GP: Any final thoughts on the new agreement and on the future of the Greener Package Database?
AZL: In my opinion, the database is nice because it takes the Sustainable Packaging Expo every year and makes it year-round. It also helps our product suppliers, our customers, and our members find better products and better options. It makes that information more accessible, and it is not going to require as much travel or as much investigation upfront. So it opens innovation to a whole new group of people.

GP: Although Walmart is gearing the database information toward its suppliers, the database can help move everyone ahead. It isn’t only available to people who are working with Walmart. It’s available to anyone who is interested in making positive changes in their packaging, correct?
AZL: Right! To make packaging more sustainable, in many instances, you need economy and scale. So having a package that only works for one retailer may not be the right solution for a more sustainable package. So it is important that other retailers, even our competitors, have the visibility to these suppliers as well. While Walmart wants to lead with innovation, it is definitely important to have other competitors have access to the same information.

Please click here to view the rest of this article courtesy of greenerpackage.com

Propel streamlines bottle, message

PepsiCo has introduced lighter-weight, eco-friendly packaging in a new bottle for Propel fitness water.

Supporting PepsiCo's continued leadership in sustainability, Propel utilizes 33% less plastic than the previous 500-mL bottle and 30% less label material. The new packaging easily can be produced with both the new cold-fill technology developed for manufacturing, primarily in the U.S., and also the conventional hot-fill system often used internationally.

The Propel bottle's design elements not only convey the brand image but also allow a look and feel of greater rigidity to a bottle with thinner walls. To appeal more to the brand's core female consumer, the bottle was redesigned with a smaller opening.

"Using dynamic, uplifting-form elements throughout the bottle, we reinforced a theme of water in motion with a sense of energy reflecting the Propel brand," says Stuart Leslie, 4sight president. "We created swooping lines of varying thicknesses in an uplifting visual motion that travel from the lower left to the upper right in the midsection."

Another advantage of the design is how it enhances the grip. The groove under the label and pinched sides at the lower third area of the bottle give the consumer a sense of security while drinking the beverage during exercising or walking.


Please click here to view the rest of this article