Deformation of Back Face armour

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.24.041343

I note you seek access to the following information:

A senior civil servant has recommended that the illegal release and falsification of information be passed to the highest level. I will ask again to you personally that I be notified of what evidence Metropolitan Police have been supplied with that the current back face deformation of armour that is used for police standards is unsafe.

What information the MPS hold that MOD’s DSTL has been releasing information illegally that they obtained from Englands Safety Ltd in relation to an application for applying for applying for home office cast approval.

Please inform me if you understand the request, and if not, what aspects you do not understand, to enable an FOI to be dealt with.

Clarification -
I contacted to seek further clarification and you explained that you wanted to know if the MPS has been informed by the Ministry of Defence - DSTL (Defence, Science and Technology Laboratory) that tests have shown there are concerns about back face deformation of body armour. You said that it has been evidenced in ballistics trials that there are concerns with MPS current safety standards.

Decision

I have today decided to disclose the located information to you in full.

Please find below information pursuant to your request above.

The MPS oversees the Health and Safety of its police officers and staff and has operational independence of any government department, therefore it is solely a MPS decision on what Life Protection Schemes (LPS) are used for our operational roles and responsibilities.

The MPS assesses roles, threat, strategic safety considerations, operational requirements and the training and tactics of our police officers and/or staff to ensure the balance within the safety case is appropriate for the introduction of a LPS. In particular, threat assessment and operational requirements for our police officers and staff are role specific and governed by “need to know” principles. The operational decisions are protected under the Government Security Classifications Policy (GSCP) and we do not share these with commercial suppliers. With regards to training and tactics employed by police officers and/or staff, a description can be found on the College of Policing website; see web link below:

College of Policing | APP (authorised professional practice)

This approach is in accordance with College of Policing published advice on risk; see web link below:

College of Policing | APP (authorised professional practice) - Risk

The MPS has numerous, in-service LPS of which the technical details, such as the build standard, engineering drawings and performance, are commercially sensitive and we do not share these with commercial competitors. We are, however, able to direct you to information published by the Home Office which outlines accredited LPS for policing and security applications, which have been overseen by UK MOD DSTL. This information can be found via the following website:

Home Office | Police Protective Equipment

Many national body armour test standards, such as the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the UK Home Office, use clay as a backing material onto which the armour sample is mounted during ballistic testing. During testing, the deformation of the armour sample is referred to as back face deformation and the associated indentation into clay is known as back face signature (BFS).

The clinical significance of back face deformation and BFS has been the subject of academic and commercial research for over 50 years. In July 2008 the US Department of Justice published the Ballistic resistance of body armor NIJ standard-0101.06, which states:

“Neither the clay backing material, nor the back face signature depth measurement reflects characteristics of the human torso or its response to ballistic impact.” [1]

The Metropolitan Police Service has not been supplied with academic evidence, which has been substantiated by independent peer review, that the back face deformation of armour used for police standards is unsafe.

Finally, we reassure you that Physical Protection Group (PPG), Threat Mitigation Technologies, Protective Security Operations has not received, nor hold, any correspondence or documentation (digital hardcopy or verbal) from MoD DSTL in relation to an application from England’s Safety Ltd for Home Office CAST approval.

[1] U.S Department of Justice (2008) Ballistic resistance of body armor NIJ standard-0101.06. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice.