Declines to limit

Describing a size

On this page13

The purpose clause So the net quantity statement stays Which is the point of the whole subsection And a size word is hard to compare Our shelf shows why The commonest sizes cluster tightly Which are volumes, and a powder is sold by weight Paragraph (2) addresses the price side of the same problem So size claims and price claims are treated together The subsection opens with a purpose test Which is why none of it constrains the container And neither is something a container catalog supplies References

To supplement the net quantity statement. Not to replace it.

The purpose clause

Standards for characterization of the size of a package which may be used to supplement the label statement of net quantity of contents.

So the net quantity statement stays

A characterization is additional. Whatever words a standard permits, the declared quantity is still declared.

Which is the point of the whole subsection

It opens by addressing regulations necessary to prevent the deception of consumers or to facilitate value comparisons. Comparison is the aim.

And a size word is hard to compare

Large and family size and value size mean nothing across brands, which is exactly why a standard for characterizing them would be needed.

Our shelf shows why

Capacity runs 100 to 3,000 mL with a median of 355. The same word would have to cover a thirtyfold range if it were applied loosely.

The commonest sizes cluster tightly

25 containers at 237 mL, 24 at 473, 21 at 118 and 14 at 946. Four sizes carry 84 of the 171, and they are 4, 8, 16 and 32 fluid ounces.

Which are volumes, and a powder is sold by weight

So even a well-characterized package size would describe the container rather than the quantity of powder in it.

Paragraph (2) addresses the price side of the same problem

It reaches printed matter representing that a commodity is offered below the ordinary retail price, or that a price advantage is accorded by reason of the size of the package or the quantity of its contents.

So size claims and price claims are treated together

Which is coherent: both are ways a package can mislead about value without misstating the quantity.

The subsection opens with a purpose test

Regulations are to be promulgated whenever the promulgating authority determines they are necessary to prevent the deception of consumers or to facilitate value comparisons. Both halves of that are about comparison rather than about safety.

Which is why none of it constrains the container

A rule aimed at comparison needs the label to be legible and the description honest. It does not need the jar to be a particular size.

And neither is something a container catalog supplies

We publish a capacity, a diameter and a height. What a package is called is yours.

References

15 U.S.C. 1454(c)(1). The promulgating authority shall promulgate regulations effective to "establish and define standards for characterization of the size of a package enclosing any consumer commodity, which may be used to supplement the label statement of net quantity of contents of packages containing such commodity, but this paragraph shall not be construed as authorizing any limitation on the size, shape, weight or mass, dimensions, or number of packages which may be used to enclose any commodity;" The subsection is an authority to promulgate regulations rather than a packaging requirement in itself, and nothing here describes the content of any regulation made under it. law.cornell.edu

The Davis Pack Supply catalog, measured 19 October 2026. 461 rows: 171 containers and 290 closures, of which 389 rows are shared with the gummies and chews group and 72 are specific to this one. 100 to 3,000 mL with a median of 355: 25 at 237 mL, 24 at 473, 21 at 118, 14 at 946, 12 at 355, 11 at 177, 10 at 562, 9 at 739. 135 PET and 36 HDPE, with no glass. 133 jars, 37 bottles, 1 tub. Necks: 70 at 89-400 and 38 at 70-400, so 108 of 171 have a mouth of 70 mm or wider, then 12 at 53-400, 10 at 58-400, 5 each at 38MM and 110-400, 4 each at 100-400, 63-485 and 43MM. Diameter is published on 152 containers at 1.8 to 5.7 inches with a median of 3.56, and height on 161 at 1.48 to 9.99 inches with a median of 3.56. Closures: 195 continuous thread polypropylene lids, 38 metal or aluminum CT caps, 22 dome lids, 13 spice caps, 8 sealing discs, 3 round tub lids, 2 phenolic, 2 dairy lids, 2 flip top caps, 1 spice sifter disc, 1 tamper evident lid. Buyability, a snapshot: 100 of 171 available, 71 not; 71 quote only; 20 full case only, with case packs from 12 to 3,150 and a median of 245.

Written from 15 U.S.C. 1454(c) and from the catalog as it stood on 19 October 2026. That subsection authorizes regulations and is not itself a packaging requirement; nothing here describes the content of any regulation promulgated under it. Our capacity field is a volume and a powder is declared by weight, and we publish no bulk density, so the two cannot be reconciled from our data. Whether any ingredient in this group may be used is the new dietary ingredient question covered in the adjacent botanicals property and is not addressed here.