Mixing breaks it
On this page14
The act is pouring
A bag of the same part number from a different heat, into a jar that already holds some. No tool and no modification.
And the result is not a defect
Every fastener in the jar is exactly what it was. The quantity is simply no longer a lot as the Act defines one.
Which is the shape this library keeps finding
The travel medication property finds a dispensed label left behind on a bottle. The home preserving property finds a code that has to be permanent.
All three are traceability rather than quality
The object is fine and the chain of information about it is broken.
And a container is the usual instrument
Because a container is where things get combined, and combining is what breaks a provenance claim.
The heat number lives on the packaging you discard
Which is the practical trap. A bag or a box carries the number and the jar it is decanted into does not.
So the decanting step is the information loss
Exactly as it is for a dispensed prescription, and for the same reason: the data was on the package rather than in the product.
Which is why the Act defines the lot rather than the fastener
A fastener can be measured and tested. A lot is a fact about history and has to be carried.
Our containers carry nothing
No lot field, no heat number, no coil reference, no production date. The jar is a jar.
And no marking service
The electrical property establishes the same absence: we publish no marking, printing, labelling or coding service on any shelf.
So the discipline is entirely on the buyer's side
One lot per container, labelled at fill time, before the bag is thrown away.
Which costs a pen and a label
And is the only thing standing between a sorted jar and an untraceable one.
Nothing here says what follows from breaking a lot
What the Act requires of whom is not described on these pages. The definition is.