By workplace & process
The same extraction that protects the sprayer's lungs also keeps a flammable atmosphere from building. One booth, two duties that meet at the filters.
The short answer
A spray booth carries two legal duties in one structure. Under COSHH it is local exhaust ventilation controlling isocyanate and solvent mist to protect health. Under the fire and explosion rules - DSEAR, the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations - it is also the control that stops a flammable atmosphere building from solvent vapour and overspray. The same airflow serves both, which is why booth testing sits where the two regimes meet.
The detail
Solvent-borne paints give off flammable vapour, and the extraction that pulls mist away from the sprayer is also what keeps that vapour below the level where it could ignite. If the airflow drops, both duties fail together: the sprayer's exposure rises and a flammable atmosphere becomes more likely. The two hazards are not separate problems bolted onto the same box - they are two consequences of the same loss of performance.
The filters are the clearest shared point. Extract filters loaded with paint overspray become a fire load in their own right, they raise resistance and choke airflow, and they are a frequent ignition and maintenance concern. A filter panel that is neglected weakens the health control and increases the fire risk simultaneously. This is why booth housekeeping - filter changes, clearing overspray, keeping ignition sources controlled - reads as both a COSHH and a DSEAR task.
What it means for you
An LEV thorough examination and test measures whether the booth is still moving air at its commissioned rate, checks the condition of filters, ducts and fan, and confirms the extraction is doing its job - all at least every fourteen months. That airflow evidence is directly useful to the fire-risk side: a booth proven to be extracting properly is also keeping vapour concentrations down, and a booth that has quietly lost airflow is failing both duties at once.
The two regimes remain distinct - the LEV test does not replace a DSEAR fire risk assessment, and a fire assessment does not replace the LEV test. But they share so much evidence that treating booth performance as a single, well-maintained system is the sensible way to satisfy both. Testing the extraction is the piece that underpins the health control and informs the fire control together.
The service behind the guide
We test spray booth extraction as LEV and report on the airflow and filter condition that also matter for fire risk, so both duties rest on the same sound evidence.
Questions
Yes. Under COSHH it is LEV controlling paint mist; under DSEAR it also controls the flammable atmosphere from solvent vapour and overspray. The same extraction serves both duties.
Not on its own. The LEV test does not replace a DSEAR fire risk assessment. But the airflow and filter evidence it produces is directly useful to the fire side, because the same performance keeps vapour concentrations down.
Extract filters loaded with paint overspray are a fire load, they raise resistance and choke airflow, and they are a common ignition and maintenance concern. Neglecting them weakens the health control and raises the fire risk together.
If booth airflow drops, the sprayer's exposure rises and a flammable atmosphere becomes more likely at the same time. The two hazards are consequences of the same loss of performance.
As LEV, at least every fourteen months under COSHH, alongside routine filter changes and overspray clearance that also support the fire-risk duties.
Phoenix Duct Clean · by the numbers
We examine spray booth LEV with an eye to the fire-risk overlap and report on airflow, filters and remedial work. Call or email to arrange it.