1. Land use planning/security related issues Group 4
Break-out session 2
Land use planning/security related issues
Group 4

2. Questions for discussion
B2-1
LAND USE PLANNING:
Main Question: What is your role and experience in reviewing and approving planning decisions in your country?
Do you cover new explosives sites, their modification and the construction of public/residential premises and traffic routes within the affected radius?
Are the rules and criteria different for explosives and pyrotechnics/fireworks
Are you automatically consulted?
Is there pressure on you to allow building near an explosives site and how do you judge the risks? If you refuse it, on what grounds can you do so? If not, what do you do?
B2-2
SECURITY
Main Question: How do you work with your police and security services in regulating and inspecting explosives and pyrotechnic/fireworks sites?
Do you see a breach of security; either to steal explosives or to blow up the premises as a significant risk?
Do you work together or which one takes the lead and has overall authority?
What is the response to an incident; explosion or security breach and who investigates it; police; security services (army/government security services) or you, the competent authority?
How do you manage the safety and security of site and local personnel during an incident?

3. B2-1 Land Use Planning Main Question: What is your role and experience in reviewing and approving planning decisions in your country?
Is there pressure on you to allow building near an explosives site and how do you judge the risks? If you refuse it, on what grounds can you do so? If not, what do you do?
For the majority of us, the municipalities have the last word, but they are ecpected to listen to advice from the explosives authorities
In some countries they must llsten to this advise, in others not.
Most countries have no problems regarding pressure to build close to explosives sites, regulation is respected
Croatia have examples of illegal construction where the owner of the illegal construction tries to get the explosives sites to move – not resolved
Norway have had cases
It: Roles set of who will se to this the municipalities decide how the land will be used, take into account technical advice from committee evaluate safety report, municipality have to take this into account. Exciting plan is hard to change. Local competent committee of explosives. New establishment, must be compatible to the area plan. Explosive properties are also follow TULP so they are far from urban area.
Ge: Regional issue, Appropriate safety distance from the spot, if a municipality want to move into the distance area it have to take into considerations more safety.
Croatia: Permit from ministry of planning the building should fulfill the environmental issues. A committee gives the permissions for new sights. It is almost the same for old sights, more storage nit manufacture in Croatia.
Slovenia: Municipal competent authority for land use planning. Seveso they look at the established safety area, explosive storage are 200 m below ground so this is not any problem.
Estonia: Before new buildings have to rescue people. Local have to listen to what they have to say. There are laws on how to build wear hoses and the safe distances is established.
Se: Municipality have the last word, there a kind of committee that look in to the technical questions. MSB has this on a remiss and
No: Almost same as Earlier.
It: Have to follow TULIPS distances
Ge: It is clear safety distances must be kept. The municipality has to built new storages if the city come to close to established sites.
C: Were illegal buildings who was set up near storages then they tried to remove the dangerous products. Who is paying? It depends on the politicians but one must move.
Slovakia: no problem they are under ground. No safety distances for sites in lower tier. Ministry decide about this.
Estonia: Not allowed to not build in de safe zone.
Se: No problem so far-
No: The local politicians does not listen when the area is nice.

4. B2-2 Security Main Question: How do you work with your police and security services in regulating and inspecting explosives and pyrotechnic/fireworks sites?
Most countries do not have cooperation with police and security services when inspecting explosives sites, and no coopertion regarding regulation.
More cooperation when accidents happen and during fire-drills
It: Inside TULPS regulation, the local committee go to the plant and goes to the inspections together. It is difficult to do inspections together, and to talk about this so all will hear the same thing and look into same thing.
Ge: No contact to the police or security. Have an emergencies planning with fire brigade the municipality are responsible. The fire brigade are responsible if something happened
C: The one with the permit has the obligation to contact the fire brigade or environmental Police keep the persone outside the danger zone.
Slovenia: The legislation say it is obligatory to have security Fire worker is leading on accidents.
Estonia: Only when something happends. Not involved at inspections.