17 replies to this topic

[exat808]

There has been discussion lately regarding the transport of fireworks that have an expired CAD ( the document issued by HSE that confirms the classification and packaging arrangements). The bottom line is that if the CAD has expired then the article cannot be moved away from its place of storage.
Two solutions exist in respect of moving the article away from the store. The first has been discussed already on forums -
1. Apply for a new CAD using either new packaging or rely upon a an existing live CAD and see if the HSE will accept a "generic" assessment

the second option has not been discussed and might be worth a try -

2. Apply to the HSE for a journey specific exemption certificate. These certificates are issued to permit the movement of unclassified articles usually from a place of storage to a place of disposal with conditions applicable that detail the type of packaging and the Hazard Division to be adopted. The exemption will have a limited life ( usually in agreement with the applicant). It may also specify the geographical start and end points of the movement.

[Richard H]

The exemption is an interesting possibility. With reference to the "Big Bang" event being organised on the UKFR forum and the number of 16" shells that many will have no doubt heard about - there is a suggestion that HSE are not keen on 16" shells in the UK and that the revoking of the CADs are a technicality to keep any existing stocks from being used. I wonder how (un)likely? it would be that HSE would reissue the CAD or even issue the above exemption in a limited number of cases. To me, it would seem better to remove and use existing stocks from storage, transporting them as the worst possible case of 1.1G from store to firing site.

[fruitfulsteve]

How many people have been killed/seriously injured transporting 16" shells/other 1.1 fireworks ?

[exat808]

a couple of questions i have if anyone knows



1) to late now to do anything but would this be the only reason HSE could issue a temporary certificate. could it be done as Richard asked used to go to site to use - Generally the exemptions are used to enable explosives to be moved for disposal - you might make a strong argument that moving an unclassified article as a one-off to its place of use was similar to a movement for disposal.

2) does it cost the importer anything to reissue the cad after the 3 years - not sure. I would imagine that the answer is "yes".

3) so technically the importer could sell his last stock 1 day before it expires legally (without telling the end user) but the end user could then get done for transporting it after the next day. Or if the importer no longer wishes to import more of the product then the end user loses out and cant do anything. technically yes, CAD's expire for a number of reasons but there is no obligation for an importer to inform his customers.

4) also doesn't this mean all fireworks have a use by date of 3 years and if it has been stored by the wholesaler for over a year it mean it could be less. (there must be billions of stock out there without a cad now) expired CADs do not infer a "use by date". neither does it necessarily mean that a firework will be any less safe to use if the CAD has expired. However fireworks by the very nature of the commercial drivers of the trade, are not intended to be stored for long periods. They are very much this years models that have to be sold and used at the earliest opportunity. Some tried and tested models remain on the market longer. The storage regulations (MSER) do make comment on the requirement to store classified and unclassified explosives separately as is also the case with serviceable and unserviceable explosives.

5) surly the whole idea of a cad is to legally know what you are transporting and what hazard type should be applied ect. so once the cad has expired should the expiry not apply to importing rather than transporting to the place of use because it is still the same product that was imported with a cad and makes no difference to hazard type. should there be at very least a cooling off period at the very minimum. The CAD is an integral part of the UN classification process and is relevant to any aspect of transportation whether it be by sea from China or by road from the wholesaler to the retailer. Importation is not relevant to the UN system.

it seem rather irisponiable that the HSE would rather old stock just be stored instead of using it considering that fireworks perform no different if they have been stored correctly I dont imagine that the HSE are inferring that old stock should just be left in the store to rot. The solutions to getting it mobile again are in place - as I mentioned in the first post on this thread.

[Karl Mitchell-Shead]

Here I am confused by Richards post further up the page. Richard suggests that if the item is without CAD it can be moved under the assumption it is 1.1g (Talking ONLY fireworks here) to its place of use.

This seems a logical approach as opposed to 'forcing stock to rot' in storage, it would take a mouse a very long time to entirely consume a 400mm shell!

Although the shells we could possibly of had have disappeared entirely off the radar (if they even existed at all) where exactly would you stand if you did have a large shell without CAD in a store and you wanted to move it to use it? Must you take the above measures and obtain an exception to transport or do you have other options?

Thanks in advance

Karl

[ToFe]

I don't see why you could not move it Karl, as long as the intended destination was one of disposal (be that firing) and you could get the permit from HSE to transport.
That's the way i have interpreted what's been said.
If you have an unclassified firework in your store it must be kept in accordance to mser, I am trying to find that bit now but I don't see it.
I think HSE will look at how the firework will be disposed and if they see it too 'risky' they'll revoke it, so even though you could argue, as has been said, firing is disposal whether you get a permit I have no idea.

Edited by ToFe, 21 April 2011 - 11:39 AM.

[Richard H]

Here I am confused by Richards post further up the page. Richard suggests that if the item is without CAD it can be moved under the assumption it is 1.1g (Talking ONLY fireworks here) to its place of use.

This seems a logical approach as opposed to 'forcing stock to rot' in storage, it would take a mouse a very long time to entirely consume a 400mm shell!

Although the shells we could possibly of had have disappeared entirely off the radar (if they even existed at all) where exactly would you stand if you did have a large shell without CAD in a store and you wanted to move it to use it? Must you take the above measures and obtain an exception to transport or do you have other options?

Thanks in advance

Karl

Just to clarify - if the item is without a CAD because it either never had one, or it has expired, then it cannot be transported legally - unless you apply for a CAD, or apply for the exemption previously discussed. There is no suggestion that you can assume that you may transport it regardless. It would seem logical to me however, that if an item previously had a CAD, has gone into storage after purchase from for example a wholesaler, CAD has expired - that you can go to HSE and possibly apply for the exception on the understanding that it is a one-off. At best, a single journey from store to place of use (and ultimately disposal!).

[exat808]

Just to clarify - if the item is without a CAD because it either never had one, or it has expired, then it cannot be transported legally - unless you apply for a CAD, or apply for the exemption previously discussed. There is no suggestion that you can assume that you may transport it regardless. It would seem logical to me however, that if an item previously had a CAD, has gone into storage after purchase from for example a wholesaler, CAD has expired - that you can go to HSE and possibly apply for the exception on the understanding that it is a one-off. At best, a single journey from store to place of use (and ultimately disposal!).

Just back from a day at the HSE. I have raised the "no CAD" scenario with the RCO who deals with fireworks and have specifically asked the questions of him "What is the HSE policy in relation to the storage of these items and the re-issue of CADS, and, what would be the probability of exemption certificates being issued for a movement from a place of storage to a place of disposal if the disposal was determined to be by the firing of the article in a display?"
I did not get an answer in full as he wished to consult with other colleagues who specialise in classification issues (also it was wind down day before Easter so we wanted to get away early).
The matter of exemptions was raised in another meeting I attended today and the stance is broadly - an exemption should only be sought in cases of urgency or where the movement of unclassified articles is for disposal by emergency services/licensing authoritiesand there is no justification for a new CAD. In all cases there should be evidence that other legislative routes cannot be used to lawfully move an unclassified article i.e. why is it not possible for the article to be re-submitted for classification?

[Richard H]

Thank-you for clarifying Danny. I suppose the question is how this is dispensation is applied in one-off cases, where you for example have a single theoretical 16" shell in your store, that has been sat there a few years and with no intention of importing any more. If you had half an ISO container full of them, then clearly getting a new CAD would be the most logical route. If you hear back from the RCO, please let us know.

[exat808]

quick question technically if you got your 16" re-cadded would this not automatic re-cad all the same shells (of the same type / manufacture) all over the uk (considering most are the same manufacture / type)

could the firework industry not just club together to get them all re cadded in one companies name then all of them would be legal in one go ?

That sounds logical. If your assumption of identical manufacture/type is correct then provided that the newly approved packaging is consistent throughout then it should be feasible.
I will email this thought to HSE next week.

[cooperman435]

If that only cover shells of the same make and type though not all 16" shells I cant imagine it would be worth it unless someone had the container full of them?

[digger]

all large 16" shells iv seen have very little effects and are mainly the same (brocade / willow ) and even though most have different box most were made by the same manufacture.

has anyone a link to the website that shows all the cads, would be interesting to see how many were caded 5 years ago

in fact could you not just cad a generic 16" shell to cover the same effect ?

sandling fireworks are the only company that hold a 16" cad in the uk (though they haven't had one in stock for at least 2 years) for all we know a lot of the 16" shells may have come from sandling 5 years ago

Unfortunately a CAD is a document specific to a device or a series of devices. If it is a series there will be drawings of all of the devices, their internals, all compositions used with their weights and a bunch of other information.

As EXAT said if they are all exactly the same device in the same packaging they could be CAD'ed as one item, If not they could be put on one CAD if classified as a series.

One interesting note not so far covered in this topic is that the 3 year limit only applies to fireworks from the default list. If it is not classified as a firework but as a pyrotechnic article for example then the CAD lasts indefinitely (more testing required though).

Edited by digger, 22 April 2011 - 09:00 PM.