Squeeze Bottles, a Locked SDS Binder, and Optional Respirators

The bottles are not compliant with 1910.1200(f).

• The portable-container exemption applies only where the chemical is transferred from a labeled container into a container intended for the immediate use by the employee who performs the transfer. Both conditions fail here in at least one respect.
• The overnight bottle: it is left on a bench and used the next morning by a different technician. Neither "immediate use" nor "by the employee who transferred it" is satisfied - the worker using it has no label, no hazard information, and no way to know the contents. It must be labeled with the product identifier and the hazard information (or using the workplace labeling system the shop has adopted, as long as the hazard information is conveyed).
• The same-shift bottle: even for the technician who poured it, the exemption is narrow. A squeeze bottle that sits at a bench for hours and may be picked up by anyone is not "immediate use." Best practice - and the defensible position in an inspection - is that every secondary container in this shop gets a label.
• Practical fix: preprinted secondary labels at each drum, or a color-coded shop labeling system with pictograms and product identifiers, plus training so workers understand what a missing label means. HazCom labels are not paperwork; an unlabeled solvent bottle is a flash-fire and skin-absorption hazard in a shop with ignition sources.
• All labels must be legible, in English (and other languages if needed for comprehension), and must not be removed or defaced while the container holds the chemical.

Access is the primary violation. SDSs must be readily accessible to employees while they are in their work area during each shift (1910.1200(g)(8)). A binder locked in an office that employees must request is a barrier - the test is whether a worker can get to the SDS without asking permission or leaving the work area. Options: keep a binder in the shop, or provide electronic access at a terminal in the work area with a backup (printed copies or a call-in number) if the system fails.

The new primer triggers three things:

1. New SDS on file - the supplier's revised SDS must be obtained and filed; it is a new chemical hazard for the shop even if it is functionally similar to the old primer.
2. Labeling - containers must carry compliant labels with the new hazard information from the supplier.
3. Training before exposure - employees must be trained on the hazards of the new chemical before they are potentially exposed, and retrained whenever a new chemical hazard is introduced into the work area (1910.1200(h)). Notice of the training obligation does not require a new binder; it requires a documented session on the new SDS's hazard statements, pictograms, PPE requirements, and spill/first-aid measures.

Also check: the shop's written hazard communication program must list the hazardous chemicals present and describe how labels, SDSs, and training are handled - including for contractors. In a 12-employee shop the program can be short, but it must exist and match what is actually done on the floor.

These are required respirators, not voluntary use.

• A box fan in a window is not an engineered control for spray primer, and isocyanate-containing 2K urethane primers are serious respiratory sensitizers. Where a respirator is necessary to protect the employee's health, the employer must provide it and must have a full written respiratory protection program (1910.134(c)(1)). Calling the same respirator "optional" does not convert required use into voluntary use.
• Required-use program elements: written program with procedures; medical evaluation before fit testing or use (1910.134(e)); annual fit testing (1910.134(f)); respirator selection based on the exposure (1910.134(d)); user seal checks; training on use, limitations, and storage (1910.134(k)); cleaning and maintenance; a cartridge change schedule rather than "change it when it smells"; program evaluation; and recordkeeping of medical clearance and fit tests.
• Engineering controls first (1910.134(a)(2)): a proper spray booth or at minimum local exhaust ventilation should be evaluated before relying on respirators. The box fan is not adequate.
• If use were genuinely voluntary (for example, a worker choosing to wear an elastomeric respirator against wood dust): the employer must determine the use will not create a hazard, provide the Appendix D information, and establish the elements needed to ensure the employee is medically able to use it and that it is cleaned, stored, and maintained. So even voluntary elastomeric use requires a medical evaluation.
• The N95-style dust mask exception: for employees whose only respirator use is voluntary use of filtering facepieces, the employer need not include them in a written program and need not provide a medical evaluation - but must still provide Appendix D information and ensure the use itself is not hazardous. Note that a dust mask provides no protection against solvent or isocyanate vapor, so if a painter is relying on one for primer, the hazard is uncontrolled.