Nobody labeled it
On this page11
The bottle that stayed
Filled for a job, set down, and still on the bench a week later. Intended only for immediate use is a condition about the bottle's life, not about the moment it was filled.
The bottle somebody else picked up
The exemption names the employee who performs the transfer. A shared squeeze bottle is outside it from the moment it is shared.
The exemption read as the rule
Treating unlabeled decants as normal because one narrow case permits them. Everything outside that case needs the full label or the identifier-plus-general-information option under (f)(6).
The second option used without the program behind it
Words, pictures or symbols work "in conjunction with the other information immediately available to employees under the hazard communication program". No program, no second option.
The decant from an unlabeled drum
The exemption requires a transfer from labeled containers. If the source is unmarked, the problem is upstream and the bench bottle is the second failure.
The two epoxy halves in identical bottles
Resin and hardener are different hazards with different labels, and mixing them up ruins the work and misstates the risk. Two bottles, two labels, and the ratio written on both.
The handwritten label that came off
A marker on bare plastic in a shop with solvent on every rag. If the label has to survive the environment, it needs to be a label rather than a note.
The touch up bottle with no date
Not a compliance failure and a real one. A finish kept for two years with no date is a finish nobody will trust when the repair is needed.
The fix is a drawer of labels beside the decanting station
Product identifier, hazard, date, who poured it. It takes longer to describe than to do.
And it is the cheapest thing in this property
Every other failure here costs a container, a batch or a fire. This one costs a label and it is the one most often skipped.