OK, I've never been too clever when it comes to COSHH and data sheets. But here's the current MSDS for our stuff. http://www.boconline.co....liquid-v1.3410_39604.pdf I'm mildly surprised that the burns property isn't classified as corrosive and the asphyxiant property isn't classified as toxic. Basically, it's not classified as hazardous which tells me that COSHH doesn't apply. Is that a fair assumption? (Appreciate risks still need to be assessed and controlled etc. but not under COSHH). Cheers

You're right, COSHH does not apply to LN2. An asphyxiant is not toxic and cold 'burns' are not corrosion. LB

Read before you hit post!! - Sorry should read "Just cos' it isn't"!

I just happened to have the L5 AcoP open when reading your post. My initial thoughts were with leadbelly, but COSHH did change and does apply. Please note: Asphyxiants 19 The revised text introduced into sub-paragraph (e) of the definition of a 'substance hazardous to health' brings within the scope of COSHH those gases and vapours which, when present at high concentrations in air at the workplace, act as simple asphyxiants. These can reduce the oxygen content to such an extent that life cannot be supported. Many of these asphyxiant gases are odourless and colourless and not readily detectable. Therefore, monitoring the oxygen content of the air is a means of ensuring that their presence does not pose a risk to the health of employees.

Doh! *reaches for copy of Regs*

The reason why it’s not included under COSHH is that the hazard does not come from its chemical properties nor it’s biological properties but from it’s physical properties. So COSHH does not apply to liquid nitrogen since none of the definitions of a hazardous substance Reg 2 apply to it BUT you still have a duty under H&S law to manage it as it can be described as a hazard under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations, so you need to do a risk assessment. What I do is I use the standard COSHH assessment forms and remove the bit where it says COSHH.

Very hazardous to your health if you drink it as the recent news item clearly show. Liquid Nitrogen obviously has some real hazards but perhaps they are classified as a Safety Hazard rather than a health hazard. Your going to risk assess its use and have some safe systems of work - the data sheet gives some examples of what they may need to be - so does it really matter if its covered by coshh or not? This reminds me of the argument about defibrillators being covered by PUWER does it really matter as long as we assess the hazards and control the risks?

AK, COSHH does apply for the reason I quoted but BH is correct - the risks from exposure still need to be controlled regardless of what specific Regs may apply.

Fair question, Brian. We've got a specific form for COSHH risk assessments which differs from our standard form. It features the 'current' hazard symbols and assessors simply delete those that not appropriate. The question from the shopfloor was basic on the face of it: "which form do we use, none of these symbols apply?" I've told them to treat it as a COSHH risk assessment.

As has been said it does not matter whether COSHH applies or not. What does matter that you identify all of the hazards associated with this material. These include: 1. Its very cold... and it will also make anything in contact with it very cold such pipework, and objects that have been immersed in it. If you are wearing gloves make sure that they are the correct ions, not gauntlet types, as the liquid can run inside them. You should use ones with elasticated cuffs. 2. The gas expands rapidly on warming to room temperature. It can explode if kept in a container with no suitable relief valve. Note that if the relief valve goes it can produce a very loud whistle, so in some circumstances the Noise at Work regulations apply. 3. As said the gas although not poisonous (toxic) it is an asphyxiant and can displace oxygen. It should only be use in well ventilated areas. In some circumstances it might be a good idea to install an oxygen level monitor.