I received an email query earlier today.
The sender has issues over the determination of "competence" by the ELO locally and also queried the inclusion (or not) of UN numbers on the application for a certificate,
My response (with slight editing for anonymity) -
As you will perhaps appreciate your community has put its head above the parapet and made the enforcing authorities very much aware that your activities do take place and have a legitimate place in the general explosives world. From the perspective of the average ELO they are very much into new territory when dealing with yourselves. The bread and butter work for the ELO is the possession of black powder by those who have muzzle loading firearms followed by commercial blasting activities in mines and quarries. Experimental use of any explosives takes the ELO out of their comfort zone.
When looking at an application for either type of explosives certificate the ELO is seeking to make a determination that the applicant is a “fit person” . The regulations go so far as to say that the Chief Officer “must” issue a certificate if he is satisfied that the applicant is a fit person (ER2014 Regulation 11(3)).
So how does the ELO make his determination that you are “fit”? In the true fashion of British legislation the answer lies in the process for refusing to grant a certificate. ER2014 Reg 19(2) lists the criteria that must be met as follows –
a. Good reason – membership of a recognised body such as UKPS and the wish to use the explosives for experimental pyrotechnic manufacture surely fits the bill
b. A responsible person who may acquire explosives without danger to the public safety or the peace – this is the catch all criteria which allows the ELO to make whatever enquires that they see fit and I think that this is where the issue of competence has arisen ( I will address that later). Generally to satisfy this criteria the ELO will use police resources such as the Police National Computer for convictions checks, national and local intelligence databases and a resource known as PND which is a database of all police related information known about an individual – such as being the subject of a stop and search, being the victim of domestic violence, being warned by an officer for public order matters – basically if you come into in contact with the police this database will know about it. There is also the issue of health. If you have indicated a previous notifiable condition then the ELO will contact your GP or Specialist and request further information and make additional enquiries as necessary.
c. Reasonable precautions to prevent loss or unauthorised access – this will relate to the provision of suitable licensed storage and adequate record keeping within the requirements of ER2014 Reg 35
d. Applicant not prohibited – as per the definition of prohibited person in ER2014 Reg 2 – basically no custodial sentences or convictions under the 1883 Explosive Substances Act
e. Not relevant to individuals
f. Fairly self explanatory
g. Also fairly self explanatory
So now to competence. The Regulations themselves are silent on the issue of competence but as I suggested earlier, competence can be tied into the criteria for determining a “fit person”.
In the commercial sector competence can be mapped against certain standards that determine how particular role requirements are structured. I have suggested jointly to UKPS and to the ELO community that competence in the experimental pyrotechnic community can also be similarly mapped without great difficulty. Similar processes work in other recreational explosive use areas such as historical re-enactment, cave exploration and wreck diving.
If you wish to read what the Guidance to the Regulations – Safety provisions states concerning competence please look at paragraphs 62 – 69 in the document. ( A Google search for ER2014 Safety Provisions should take you to a PDF of the document).
A key factor is the list of bullet points at para 69 and in particular “membership of a relevant representative association or society” – UKPS very much fits the bill here.
I am trying to educate the ELO community through bulletins and other means that the concept of experimental manufacture of pyrotechnic substances is a wholly legitimate practice and this will be further reinforced when I run the next national course next month which will be the first to take on board ER2014.
With regard to the UN numbers situation on certificates. Currently ELO’s are constrained to adding only specific UN numbers that the applicant has requested, thereby not allowing for things that may be manufactured a bit further down the line. I am looking at getting a form of words such as “Any Pyrotechnic substance subject of the Regulations” or similar to be added to certificates from applicants such as yourself. This is more of an administrative process for the police and Home Office to deal with as it requires changes to the software that runs the licensing and certification management system.
The determination of what UN numbers go on a certificate or not is summed up in ER2014 Reg5 para 3.
Happy to answer queries like this or arising from this response but only by email to me in the first instance.
danny@skewenergetics.co.uk
