Child resistant packaging

The closures we hold

On this page10

Why they are on the shelf What the flag is and is not The numbers A child resistant closure is a system Which collides with the rinse requirement So settle the neck first And it is not a safety claim Child resistant is not childproof Test it with the people who will use it References

They are here by derivation, not because somebody went looking after the fact.

Why they are on the shelf

The liquid archetype carries a child-resistant flag in our process constraints, so the shelf is built with those closures included rather than leaving them to be found later.

What the flag is and is not

It is a prompt to run the formula against 157.22. It is not a finding that your product needs the closure, which depends on toxicity data and on how your label reads.

The numbers

496 closures on this shelf: 292 continuous thread, 43 dropper assemblies, 30 child resistant, 19 flip tops, 19 trigger sprayers, 18 spouted, 15 dome lids, 14 phenolic and 10 round tub lids.

A child resistant closure is a system

It performs against a protocol with the container and the liner it is used with. Changing the bottle or the liner is changing the system, and the performance does not travel automatically.

Which collides with the rinse requirement

A child resistant closure usually needs a specific neck finish, and the rinse standard wants a neck wide enough to clean through. Both constrain the neck and they do not always agree.

So settle the neck first

24-410 at 198, 38-400 at 150, 20-410 at 107, 89-400 at 74, 20-400 at 65 and 45-400 at 54. Staying on a well populated finish is what keeps both requirements satisfiable.

And it is not a safety claim

A child resistant closure is a packaging requirement for specified products. It does not make the contents safe and it does not replace the hazard and precautionary statements on the label.

Child resistant is not childproof

The standard is about the time and dexterity a closure demands, not about being impossible to open. The label still says to keep the product out of reach of children, and that instruction is doing real work.

Test it with the people who will use it

The same closure that defeats a child defeats an arthritic gardener. A product aimed at home users is handled by people across a wide range of grip strength, and a closure nobody can open gets left off.

References

The Davis Pack Supply catalog, measured 18 October 2026. The growing inputs shelf is 1,075 rows: 579 containers and 496 closures, derived from three packaging archetypes across nine leaves. 276 PET, 203 HDPE, 85 glass, 14 PP and 1 LDPE, from 10 to 9,464 mL with a median of 125 and 42 containers at 1 litre or more. The closures include 30 child resistant, 19 trigger sprayers and 18 spouted.

40 CFR 157.22, child-resistant packaging for pesticides: "Unless exempted under 157.24, a pesticide product must be distributed and sold in child-resistant packaging" where it meets a toxicity criterion and "the product's labeling either directly recommends residential use or reasonably can be interpreted to permit residential use". The toxicity criteria include an acute oral LD50 of 1.5 g/kg or less, an acute dermal LD50 of 2000 mg/kg or less, an acute inhalation LC50 of 2 mg/litre or less, irreversible eye damage or corneal involvement persisting 21 days or more, and tissue destruction or severe skin irritation at 72 hours. law.cornell.edu

Written from 40 CFR 156.10, 165.25 and 157.22, and from the catalog as it stood on 18 October 2026. A pesticide may not be distributed or sold in the United States unless it is registered, and the label is approved as part of that registration; nothing here is a substitute for EPA guidance on a specific product, and whether a given product is a pesticide at all is a determination with consequences.