1910.1200(f)(8): Portable Container Labeling Exemption
Employers do not have to label portable containers that hold hazardous chemicals transferred from labeled containers when the container is intended only for the immediate use of the employee who did the transfer. Drugs dispensed by a pharmacy to a health care provider for direct patient use are also exempt from labeling.
Key takeaways
- 1910.1200(f)(8) is part of OSHA's general industry standards (29 CFR Part 1910).
- OSHA cited it 18 times in the last 3 years, in 18 inspections, with $16,201 in current penalties.
- Most citations: CT (4), TN (3), VA (2).
- Related part: 1910.1200(f) Labels and other forms of warning (2,653 citations).
- Free 5-minute toolbox talk for your crew below.
In this article
What this rule covers
29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(8) is one requirement inside 1910.1200 Hazard communication, an OSHA general industry standard (Part 1910). The official text below is copied word for word from the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR). The numbers, injury cases and training on this page show how OSHA enforces it on real job sites.
Official text
(8) The employer is not required to label portable containers into which hazardous chemicals are transferred from labeled containers, and which are intended only for the immediate use of the employee who performs the transfer. For purposes of this section, drugs which are dispensed by a pharmacy to a health care provider for direct administration to a patient are exempted from labeling. 18 citations
Source: eCFR, text current as of 2026-10-15. Read all of 1910.1200.
Where and how often it was cited
| Year | Citations |
|---|---|
| 2024 | 10 |
| 2025 | 5 |
| 2026 | 3 |
Top states: CT (4), TN (3), VA (2), VT (2), MI (2)
Largest penalties
| Employer | Location | Penalty for this rule |
|---|---|---|
| BREEZE IN CORPORATION | JUNEAU, AK | $3,111 |
| CHRISTIANSBURG QD, LLC. | CHRISTIANSBURG, VA | $2,880 |
| CONTINENTAL WEB PRESS, INC. | ITASCA, IL | $2,650 |
| LIGHT METALS CORP | WYOMING, MI | $2,400 |
| KERBER COMPANY LLC | GUILFORD, VT | $2,074 |
Free toolbox talk
A 5-minute crew talk on 1910.1200(f)(8), plus alerts when this rule changes. Free.
OSHA interpretation letters
None exist. OSHA has not published a letter of interpretation for 1910.1200(f)(8).
Related parts of this rule
- 1910.1200(f) Labels and other forms of warning 2,653 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(6) 2,464 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(6)(ii) 1,516 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(6)(i) 196 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(10) 112 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(7) 25 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(1) Labels on shipped containers 13 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(5) Transportation 12 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(9) 6 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(1)(iv) 2 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(1)(vi) 2 citations
- 1910.1200(f)(5)(ii) 1 citations
Get your crew competent
Trainers on Black Belt Safety: Marc Harvey, Dana Reyes
Trainers and suppliers: feature your business on this rule for $25/month.
Frequently asked questions
Do I need to label a squirt bottle I just filled?
Not if it was filled from a labeled container and is only for your immediate use as the person who did the transfer.
What if someone else will use the container?
The exemption covers only containers intended for the immediate use of the employee who performs the transfer.
Are pharmacy drugs covered?
Drugs dispensed by a pharmacy to a health care provider for direct administration to a patient are exempt from labeling.
About this page
Sources
- 29 CFR 1910.1200 (eCFR), text current as of 2026-10-15
- U.S. Department of Labor enforcement data: OSHA inspections, citations and accident records, copied nightly; data as of 2026-10-20
3-year window. Federal OSHA only; state-plan rules are not counted. Plain-language text is a summary, not legal advice; the official text controls. Black Belt Safety is not part of OSHA or the Department of Labor.