The broad requirements for conducting background checks for staff regulated under the National Aviation Security Programme (NASP), engaged in roles outside the Security Restricted Area (SRA), are the same as those for staff operating inside the SRA (where a SIA exemption already exists), e.g. where airside passes are issued.
Frequently asked questions about SIA exemptions
What are the new requirements for vetting aviation security staff engaged in roles outside the airport SRA?
Certain aviation security personnel located outside the SRA and undertaking functions regulated in the NASP will be required to successfully complete a background check (which includes a CRC). This requirement was introduced via a More Stringent Measure (MSM) which took effect on 6 June 2012.
See the Department for Transport's Surefax letter (March 2012) for more information
Why are CRCs required? Aviation security personnel outside the SRA already meet EU baseline vetting standards (i.e. pre-employment checks)
This is necessary to introduce consistency. Some sectors of the aviation security industry were in breach of the Private Security Industry Authority Act 2001 (PSIA), the legislation regulating the private security industry (including the SIA licensing provisions), which requires certain security functions to be licensable. Staff contravening the PSIA are liable to committing an offence. Exemptions also avoid dual regulation of the aviation security industry under the NASP and the PSIA.
The Department for Transport submitted an application for an exemption from the requirement for certain aviation security personnel engaged in roles outside the airport SRA to obtain a SIA licence. The PSIA gives the Secretary of State powers to exempt staff who are subject to 'suitable alternative arrangements'. These are defined in the PSIA as arrangements that are "equivalent, for all practical purposes so far as the protection of the public is concerned, to those applying to persons applying for and granted licences".
This equivalence is determined by a comparison with the SIA's licensing requirements. Suitable alternative arrangements for the purposes of a licensing exemption necessitate imposing a baseline vetting requirement of a background check (which is comparable with the SIA licensing regime) in order for the request for an exemption to be granted. The alternative to not seeking an exemption would be for aviation security staff to obtain a SIA licence. This would be vastly more onerous in cost and time consuming. The cost of obtaining a CRC is less financially burdensome. Moreover, securing a SIA exemption maintains a single regulatory approach for respective sectors of industry and clear lines of responsibility.
NASP-regulated personnel working in roles which are not designated as licensable by the SIA are not required to undergo background checks. Will this approach continue?
The roles and functions outlined in section 2 of the table attached with the Department for Transport's Surefax (March 2012) are not licensable by the SIA and an exemption (requiring a CRC) for these roles and functions is therefore not applicable. However, the requirement for all NASP-regulated cargo security staff to obtain a CRC may be mandated in the future. Any proposal to do so will be subject to a full risk assessment and consultation with industry under a separate work-stream
The term 'manned guarding' originates from the PSIA and applies to any of the following activities:
- Guarding premises against unauthorised access or occupation, against outbreaks of disorder or against damage.
- Guarding property against destruction or damage, against being stolen or against being otherwise dishonestly taken or obtained.
- Guarding one or more individuals against assault or against injuries that might be suffered in consequence of the unlawful conduct of others.
All of the above include providing a physical presence, or carrying out any form of patrol or surveillance.
Please see Schedule 2 of the PSIA for a full description.
For the purposes of the SIA licensing exemption under the NASP, such activities should be interpreted as those relating to the undertaking of an aviation security function.
The SIA licensing provisions do not apply in respect of, for example, administrative or IT-related roles that do not have a security control function, i.e. those not designated as licensable under the PSIA and for which CRCs are not required.
If you remain in any doubt whether a particular NASP-regulated role is subject to SIA licensing and hence require a CRC to effect an exemption, please contact the SIA directly.
What if a criminal record certificate at basic disclosure level reveals an unspent disqualifying conviction?
Where a person's criminal record certificate lists a disqualifying conviction set out in the SCD (Schedule 11-1) and the Secretary of State for Transport has not issued a Certificate of Disregard relating to that person in respect of that conviction, that person cannot successfully complete a background check and is therefore ineligible to work in a NASP regulatory role.
"Disposal" is a generic legal term meaning that a court case or proceeding has been completed or has reached a resolution. In respect of a term of imprisonment, the disposal is the full sentence or prison term handed down by the judge or magistrate, not the actual time served. In other words, if a person has served 2 years out of a 3 year prison sentence, the time period to be taken into account in relation to a conviction for a disqualifying offence is 3 years.
You may appeal directly to the body that provided the disclosure certificate (Disclosure Scotland or Access NI) if you believe that the convictions shown are not yours or that the record is not yours, or that the conviction shown should be spent. You should use existing company grievance procedures if an employer has decided not to forward an application to a security clearance issuer because it believes that the disclosure shows that you have a disqualifying conviction. Where security clearance is provided by a separate security clearance issuer, you should use the appeals procedure operated by that issuer (e.g. the airport manager).
You may apply to the CAA for a 'Certificate of Disregard' if you have a disqualifying conviction which you feel should be disregarded for the purposes of confirming a background check and issuing the necessary clearance for the specified role.
What action should an employer take if a criminal record certificate reveals a disqualifying conviction for an employee already in post who is awaiting a decision on an application for a Certificate of Disregard?
Individuals undertaking NASP functions outside the SRA for which a CRC is required cannot continue in that role unless they have successfully completed a background check.
Notification on a criminal record certificate of a disqualifying conviction would mean that a background check has not been successfully completed and would render an operative non-compliant with the NASP unless and until an application for a Certificate of Disregard is successful. An employer must therefore remove the employee from the NASP role (perhaps to another non-NASP activity) while the appeal is being determined. It is the CAA's intention to issue a determination letter to the applicant within 28 days of the application.
This is consistent with the process presently in place for individuals applying for an airside pass.
In all cases, a criminal record certificate remains valid for up to 10 weeks from the date of issue, but the period during which the CAA is determining an application for a Certificate of Disregard (and during any subsequent appeal) will not count towards the 10 weeks.
The SIA will continue to regulate security functions that do not fall under the NASP. This means that roles undertaken such as by check-in staff (who ask relevant security questions), profilers and retail security staff at directed airports will remain under SIA regulation. All security roles in relation to General Aviation airfields will also fall under the remit of the SIA.