British Board of Agrément (BBA) Evidence - Monday 15th March 2021 (1/2)

Full transcript

00:00:07 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to hear evidence from another person who is involved in examining the iconic application

00:00:18 in examining the iconic application on behalf of the british board of agreement

00:00:21 agreement so as usual i'm joined by my fellow panel members mysterio istafan and mr ali akbar good morning good morning everyone

00:00:34 good morning good morning everyone and and now i think we could meet today's witness who is miss valentina amoroso are you there

00:00:41 there samarazzo yes good morning good morning you can see me can you and hear me clearly

00:00:46 clearly yes very good thank you very much now i think you

00:00:50 think you uh are going to make the affirmation which appears on the screen in front of you is that right

00:00:57 yes good thank you so could i ask you to read the words from the screen please yes i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the

00:01:08 and truly declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth very good thank you very much indeed um we have one or two things just to clarify before we go any further first

00:01:20 clarify before we go any further first of all can you confirm that you are alone in the room from which you're giving evidence yes thank you can you confirm that you have no documents or other materials with you

00:01:30 with you correct yes thank you and finally can you confirm that your mobile phone is in another room and that you don't have any other electronic device with you which is capable of receiving messages

00:01:42 capable of receiving messages that's the case very good thank you very much um

00:01:45 much um i hope we shouldn't have problems with sound or vision if we do we'll have a short break while the uh technical people are on the mat all right

00:01:55 right we shall have a break in the course of the morning probably around about 11 15 and if you're still going again in the middle of the afternoon at around 3 15 but if you need an additional break at

00:02:07 but if you need an additional break at any time will you just indicate that and we'll

00:02:09 we'll try and accommodate you all right okay um is there anything you'd like to ask me or anything points you'd like to make before we start yeah ready to go then all right thank

00:02:22 yeah ready to go then all right thank you very much in that case i'm going to invite mr millet to ask you some questions yes mr millet thank you mr chairman uh and good morning and good morning to the panel good morning also miss amoroso can i

00:02:34 good morning also miss amoroso can i thank you first please for uh attending this inquiry and giving your evidence we are extremely grateful to you

00:02:41 you uh if you uh have any difficulties in understanding my questions or need me to put a question another way or to repeat it then i'm very happy to do that can i also please ask you to keep your

00:02:53 can i also please ask you to keep your voice up

00:02:54 voice up so that the transcriber who's also on this call can get down exactly what you what you say also if you nod or shake your head that doesn't go onto the transcript so you

00:03:05 doesn't go onto the transcript so you have to say yes or no as the case may be if you feel you need a break at any time as the chairman has said then please just let us know we'll take scheduled breaks but if you need a break at a different time then let us know we can take a

00:03:17 time then let us know we can take a short break um if it be and finally can i just ask you to confirm that you can see and hear me clearly yes thank you now can we start by

00:03:28 yes thank you now can we start by looking at your witness statement for the inquiry it's a bba

00:03:35 3010797

00:03:40 it should come up on the screen in front of you that's the first page of the statement dated the 10th of january 2020 and it's 20 paid 21 pages long can i ask

00:03:52 and it's 20 paid 21 pages long can i ask you to go to page 21 please

00:03:56 is that your signature above the date yes it is

00:03:59 yes it is have you read this statement recently yeah

00:04:03 yeah can you go to page nine please

00:04:07 you'll see on page nine paragraph 48

00:04:13 uh and uh you know it answers a question what information including certificates and reports did you consider in your review uh and you explain what you reviewed

00:04:23 reviewed uh there uh including the certificate hold of technical data as detailed at paragraph 48 below uh what did you mean there we weren't able to find what it was you were referring

00:04:35 to find what it was you were referring to can you help us uh yes i think if you go to perhaps the next page

00:04:43 next page you should find a list of the documents that i reviewed

00:04:51 perhaps we'll come to that in due course it's not exactly clear to us what that is uh

00:04:58 is uh other than that can you confirm that the contents of this witness statement are true

00:05:03 true yes have you discussed your statement or the evidence that you're going to give today with anybody before coming onto this call

00:05:10 this call no now when you were working at the bba did you know uh the entity known as alcoa

00:05:19 alcoa yes and that later became iconic didn't it i think yes and i'm going to refer to that entity as our comic except where the word our name alcoa appears in the documents

00:05:31 appears in the documents now i'm going to start by asking you some questions about your background and training

00:05:35 training can we look at your statement please while it's still on the screen at page two and i'd like you to go please to paragraph four

00:05:43 you say there that you graduated in 2012 with a materials engineering msc honours at the university of naples and then after that you say paragraph five i

00:05:55 after that you say paragraph five i worked for a year one year and a half as a research and development engineer in a center for research on materials csm

00:06:03 csm spa in italy where i focused my efforts in the research on new methods of manufacturing titanium alloy components for the aircraft industry

00:06:12 industry and began i think work at the bba in november 2014.

00:06:18 yeah september september 2014 and that's paragraph six and you say in that paragraph that your first position at the bba was

00:06:29 that your first position at the bba was in the materials department currently construction project products but i was quickly reallocated to the engineering department following an internal restructuring program do i understand correctly that there

00:06:40 do i understand correctly that there were at least two departments materials and engineering yeah yes and materials is it right materials became the construction products department yeah

00:06:54 products department yeah but you were moved i think is this right to the engineering department that's correct uh now paragraph seven if you just look on down the screen you say i started to work in the cladding team

00:07:05 work in the cladding team around beginning of november 2014 and as a new starter i was assigned simpler jobs

00:07:11 jobs like reviews and reissues of existing certificates that's when i started to work on the reyno bond certificate um you refer to a cladding team there was that in the engineering department

00:07:23 was that in the engineering department yes can you explain why cladding would be in the engineering department and not in the materials department because the cladding uh used to be

00:07:34 because the cladding uh used to be assessed

00:07:34 assessed as um as a as a system so with structural properties and therefore couldn't be part of the materials department only

00:07:47 materials department only so in essence sorry in essence the key difference is that whilst in the material department products used to be assessed primarily for uh

00:07:58 for uh physical durability properties uh in the engineering department uh there used to be um assessment for structural properties as well

00:08:09 right does that tell us that when you arrived in the department and started working on the renault bond certificate the emphasis was on how the panels worked within a structure or as part of a structure

00:08:22 structure or as part of a structure as opposed to examining the material makeup

00:08:26 makeup of the panel itself uh it was both it was both i see now is it right that at some point there was a new construction products department

00:08:38 a new construction products department created within the bba yes and was the cladding team in that department no it's i see so the cladding

00:08:49 no it's i see so the cladding team as it were remained within the engineering department yes can you just tell us when the new construction products department was created

00:08:57 created from your memory uh it was around probably october shortly after i joined bba right i see now we heard from hammer gregorian that

00:09:09 now we heard from hammer gregorian that there was a decision only to satis certify the flat material the panel itself and not the system in which it

00:09:20 system in which it was fixed um if if that's right and if the reynabon certificate was a about the panel itself the product why

00:09:31 the panel itself the product why would that not have been within the remit of the materials team the materials department because a cladding um a cladding panel

00:09:43 a cladding um a cladding panel will still need to have structural properties that have to be assessed even if it's just face fixed it's applied on the building and so that those structural properties

00:09:55 those structural properties has to be assessed right

00:09:59 did anybody from the materials department within the bba have any input into the rainy bond certificate itself

00:10:10 into the rainy bond certificate itself or was it left all to the structural department well at the time at the time i was working on that certificate that certificate was already in place so the

00:10:21 the the assessment the original assessment had already been done so i cannot speak for what happened previously no that's that's fair um but when you

00:10:32 no that's that's fair um but when you were involved uh did anybody from the engineering department which i meant by materials department have any input into the reviews in which you were involved relating to

00:10:43 in which you were involved relating to that certificate yes of course because i was a new starter i

00:10:48 starter i was always referring to my superiors yeah

00:10:52 yeah going back to your your education and training was any of your education on fire engineering not at the time but following uh in the following months yes you say in the following months

00:11:05 yes you say in the following months in the following months did you get did you actually get any training on fire engine engineering yeah it was primarily

00:11:13 primarily um training on the job reading standards and then

00:11:16 and then attending following attending um conferences and attending full-scale file tests right as i was specializing on

00:11:27 right as i was specializing on on the subject yes i see i'll come back to that in a moment um at the time you joined uh looking at your education up to that point um have you had any training on

00:11:39 um have you had any training on cladding design for example no

00:11:45 and what about fire safety and fire behavior

00:11:48 behavior no i was learning everything at the time so before you join the bba do i take it that you had no prior

00:11:59 that you had no prior knowledge or experience of the british standards 476 suite of tests or the

00:12:06 the european uh fire safety classification tests

00:12:10 tests no

00:12:19 when you joined the bba did you have any knowledge of the uk building regulations not before you know right

00:12:29 had you heard of a proof document be or seen a copy of it at that point when you joined

00:12:36 joined no no no

00:12:43 now when you arrived you i think reported to a team manager

00:12:50 manager is that right yes and we understand i think that from the 5th of january 2015 that became prayer and a como

00:13:02 that became prayer and a como correct do you recall who your team manager was before pranacamo

00:13:09 pranacamo um i had a team manager when i joined uh the materials department and then that person left bba so in the months between october and january i

00:13:20 months between october and january i didn't have a team manager and i was reporting directly to the head of approval who was that brian chamberlain brian chamberlain i see and did he

00:13:33 brian chamberlain i see and did he report

00:13:33 report to a section head correct who was that he was reporting directly to the operations manager at that time that was brian moore was it

00:13:44 at that time that was brian moore was it correct

00:13:47 so before prana komo joined we have the structure that you report to brian chamberlin and he reported to brian moore and is it right that after prana como came in

00:13:59 right that after prana como came in as team manager you reported to him and he reported to brian moore have i got that right uh he reported to brian chamberlain who reported to brian moore

00:14:11 reported to brian moore i see i see right the engineering department

00:14:19 i'm sorry could you say that again i think i overspoke um brian chamberlain was the head of the engineering department so he was overseeing the work of the team managers and the program managers

00:14:31 managers now um going back to your training you told us that everything was new when you joined i paraphrase did there come a time

00:14:42 i paraphrase did there come a time during your uh um role within the cladding team from november 2014

00:14:49 2014 you came to learn about the uk testing regime and bs 476 yes when do you think that was

00:15:00 yes when do you think that was well i think it was straight away when i started to work on the first cladding projects because as part of the review i was reviewing the regulations and so i was starting to ask questions

00:15:12 and so i was starting to ask questions about

00:15:13 about which standards we were referring to and why

00:15:17 why who was answering those questions it was primarily my team manager there was also my mentor

00:15:24 and that was brian chamberlain was it in the first couple of months yes and then praying carmel i see did you have any in those few months did you have any

00:15:36 you have any formal training from them or was it all informal on the job training what do you mean by formal training uh classroom

00:15:45 classroom desktop slideshows presentation materials

00:15:48 materials no it was never formal no i see so when you arrived i'm just trying to get a picture of how this training worked um did brian chamberlain give you the british standards and tell you what to

00:16:00 british standards and tell you what to look at or did he take you through them explain to us how that worked it was more of a

00:16:05 more of a proactive type of training whereby i would be

00:16:10 would be for example in this specific case i will be going through the certificate and i will go through all the standards referenced in those and ask questions

00:16:21 referenced in those and ask questions about why would be referring to one standard as opposed to another or why would be referring to certain parts of the billionaire as opposed to others and then i will go through the building

00:16:32 and then i will go through the building regs and try to read through uh those clauses that we were referring to i follow and in that answer when you say i would be going through the certificate

00:16:43 i would be going through the certificate is that a is that describing generally what would happen or is that describing what you did in relation to the reyno bond certificate in particular that was generally what would happen i follow

00:16:55 follow so you would sit there with a certificate any certificate and the building regulations and the standards referred to is that right yes but you would have to teach yourself about what those meant

00:17:06 teach yourself about what those meant is this right rather than actually being taken through them and inhabiting having it it will explain to you yes that was primarily as a first attempt yes

00:17:18 attempt yes did you have any do you remember having any particular questions about either the building regulations what and what they meant or how the british standards worked or

00:17:29 how the british standards worked or what the tests involved well yeah at the beginning as a new starter the questions were

00:17:35 were many um i think reading standards and trying to understand the testing methodology wasn't the wasn't the most difficult thing to catch up it was

00:17:47 difficult thing to catch up it was primarily trying to interpret the building rights um that was a bit trickier yes i see and do you remember particularly casting your mind back what particular

00:17:59 your mind back what particular aspect of the building regulations you found tricky

00:18:06 just trying to understand uh why we were referring to certain closes as opposed to others to me it was all new

00:18:14 all new so i had to ask why we were referring to certain parts as opposed to others and also at the time as part of the review i would be reviewing similar certificates and i'd

00:18:26 reviewing similar certificates and i'd be asking why we were referring to some clauses in one and some others in another

00:18:32 another i see and who would answer those questions generally in those first few months

00:18:37 months well praying como even though he wasn't appointed as a team manager yet was as a technical expert on the subject so i would still be referring to him

00:18:49 i would still be referring to him where possible even though he wasn't my formal manager i see you say um mr chairman sorry to interrupt myself

00:19:00 mr chairman sorry to interrupt myself but

00:19:00 but i'm just noting that the transcript has a lost connection on it well that's me i don't know whether yours does you're quite right it does um afraid i wasn't really concentrating

00:19:11 um afraid i wasn't really concentrating on the transcript perhaps i should have been um and i'm told by ms grange who's been who's messaged me that hers has as well i don't want john i think now i think we

00:19:23 i don't want john i think now i think we better pause while the connection is restored uh miss amarezzo i'm sorry about this having said that i hope we wouldn't have a problem with the technology here we are with one we'll have a short break now and i hope

00:19:36 we'll have a short break now and i hope we can return to you with a working transcript for the rest of us uh before very long all right

00:19:42 all right i'm told mr chairman i'm told that it's now back and i i think you could probably see that it is that was a very temporary blip right well they were that was quickly resolved

00:19:53 well they were that was quickly resolved wasn't it

00:19:53 wasn't it i'm glad well i'm hoping that's well thank you

00:19:56 thank you thank you for picking that up and uh i think you can go on uh yes um miss amarozzo um you say uh that i'm just trying to find

00:20:07 you say uh that i'm just trying to find it i think the connection got lost but i think you said that prayer nakomo was is this right was an expert in matters of fire regulation yeah exactly how you perceive it no i

00:20:18 yeah exactly how you perceive it no i said that he was uh the expert in the clouding area so it was my

00:20:23 was my main point of reference right certificates but not specifically for fire

00:20:28 fire i see was there any other point of reference

00:20:32 reference specifically in relation to fire that you would draw upon when having your questions answered

00:20:40 yes i mean primarily i would refer to john obama as a technical lead but uh in time i also um

00:20:51 but uh in time i also um started to have conversation with biari

00:20:55 you had conversations with the bre yourself did you yes can you tell us who you had those conversations with primarily stephen howard

00:21:06 primarily stephen howard howard and do you remember when you were having those conversations was this was this in the early part of your time there or i recall i i remember that i attended a

00:21:18 i attended a conference at the bre that was related to cladding and fire specifically and then i started to reach out to him from that point onwards

00:21:29 reach out to him from that point onwards how regularly would you reach out to stephen howard when and if required it wasn't it wasn't a regular um expert that would

00:21:41 it wasn't a regular um expert that would involve

00:21:42 involve yes but um can you give us a feel for the frequency for example in your first review that you started in december 2014 uh and which finished in the spring of

00:21:54 uh and which finished in the spring of 2015 do you remember roughly how many times if at all you would have contacted stephen howard no no i never counted him at that point what were the arrangements under which you would um you would speak

00:22:06 under which you would um you would speak to him

00:22:07 to him uh was there a by which i mean formal arrangements was there a contract or a consultancy agreement or anything like that no no it was it was informal i would contact him primarily to to ask

00:22:18 i would contact him primarily to to ask his opinion on some things that i couldn't understand clearly but it was probably two or three times overall

00:22:28 overall we met a few times during testing when i when i was there for testing uh but i wouldn't use him as a

00:22:36 a as a consultant did anybody at the bba tell you that you could or should speak to the bre if you had any questions or was this something that you did of your own initiative

00:22:47 own initiative it was in on my own initiative and did you report uh that fact to your seniors at the bba

00:22:56 my career goal did you record uh advice uh that stephen howard gave you from time to time as i said it wasn't formal so there was

00:23:08 as i said it wasn't formal so there was no recording did you did the pba pay for the bre for that advice absolutely not

00:23:20 so it was it as simple as just you picking up the phone or the phone to him yes did you ever send him any emails

00:23:30 not that i recall no if i ever send him emails they were specifically for a project where they were carrying out tests so that was a formal

00:23:40 formal arrangement and what about xover do you remember

00:23:43 remember there being a consultancy agreement with x over a formal consultancy agreement no did anybody ever tell you that no that not that i was aware of i think at some point someone mentioned

00:23:54 i think at some point someone mentioned it to me but i never had the chance to use this uh agreement so did you do i take it from that you never spoke to anyone at xover and asked their advice only the bre

00:24:07 their advice only the bre yes as i said in in an informal way

00:24:12 and do you remember when you first contacted stephen howard about about anything on which you wanted his advice

00:24:20 advice no i i cannot recall that do you remember whether you spoke to mr howard specifically about anything in relation to the reyno bond certificate no i don't think i ever

00:24:32 certificate no i don't think i ever spoken to him about that specifically right um going back to expertise

00:24:40 was there a time when you became aware that there were two parallel uh regimes for fire testing the national class and the european

00:24:53 the national class and the european class

00:24:55 class when yes

00:24:59 when yes yes when

00:25:02 i cannot recall exactly when but um when when i started to work on more than one uh

00:25:08 one uh certificate it became apparent that um yeah in some certificates we were referring to uh the european standard they need some others to the british standard and yeah and all the consequences

00:25:23 and yeah and all the consequences did you become aware at any time that there was a a difference between the testing regimes as between the nationals british standards on the one hand and the european testing regime on the

00:25:34 and the european testing regime on the other

00:25:36 other yeah it must have been within the first year that i was working at bba right did you become aware that under the

00:25:43 the british standard 476 parts six and seven you test a flat specimen whereas under the european tests or at least one of the european tests required under the european system

00:25:55 european system you have to test the product in a fabricated form that's the single burning item test yes that

00:26:02 that that is of course depending on the classification you want to go for right now when do you think you first became aware of that distinction the distinction in the testing methodologies

00:26:14 methodologies as i said i can't place it exactly in any point in time but it must have been in the first year that i was working for the clouding team right we say the first year that takes you beyond

00:26:26 first year that takes you beyond the date you finished the review that your first review that you did in relation to the rainy bond certificate do you think it was before that or after that you became aware of this distinction

00:26:38 you became aware of this distinction i cannot really tell if it was within those months or afterwards it's um

00:26:45 um something that you picked up with time now

00:26:49 now going back to approved document b again was that was something you would look at as you told us before during the course of your reviews of the certificates um can we look at approved

00:27:00 certificates um can we look at approved document b we'll find it at clg-50224

00:27:11 and this uh is volume two which would have been

00:27:15 have been this is the version current as of 2013 and this would be the would have been the version current at the time you started at the bba in late 2014.

00:27:26 2014. uh could i take it that you recognize this document yes uh and did you understand when you first came across it that it was guidance uh on how to comply

00:27:40 guidance uh on how to comply with the building regulations yes uh did you understand that if a designer follows the guidance set out in the

00:27:51 follows the guidance set out in the approved documents such as approved document b then they will be compliant with the building regulations yes that was the understanding was this

00:28:02 yes that was the understanding was this you know again do i take it that you never had any formal training on this document

00:28:07 document there was formal training on uh building regulations in the time i was a bba but i can't remember when it must have been definitely after i started to work on the reno bone

00:28:20 i started to work on the reno bone certificate i i see and i think there is a formal presentation in 2016. does that ring a bell with you um yeah sounds about right we're going

00:28:31 um yeah sounds about right we're going to look at it with some other witnesses and we can see it with you if we need to but before 2016 do you remember getting any formal training on approved document b no um can we look at page 97

00:28:50 uh

00:28:54 this is something called diagram 40. does this ring a bell with you yes

00:29:02 um if you look at the diagram at the bottom

00:29:06 bottom left you can see it's a building of a height 18 meters or more

00:29:14 more and that's any building uh but the boundary is less than a thousand millimeters from the foot of the building uh and it's all shaded in a dark shade

00:29:26 and it's all shaded in a dark shade uh and under e any building that's another building above 18 meters uh where the boundary is more than a thousand millimeters from the foot of the building and you can see that the top part is

00:29:38 and you can see that the top part is shaded

00:29:39 shaded and if you look at the key on the right hand side you can see that the shaded color second from the top says class naught national class or class b

00:29:49 class b s3 d2 or better european class uh when you um you when you began in the first few months in the cladding department

00:30:00 months in the cladding department at the bba did you become familiar with that requirement for buildings over 18 meters yes you did and if you look at the notes at the bottom it says the national

00:30:11 the bottom it says the national classifications do not automatically equate with the equivalent european classifications therefore

00:30:17 therefore products cannot typically assume a european class unless they have been tested accordingly during your time working uh with arconic on the bva certification of rayner bond

00:30:28 on the bva certification of rayner bond 55

00:30:29 55 did you appreciate that this document says that you cannot automatically equate a european results with a british national class result

00:30:40 with a british national class result yes you did what did that mean to you

00:30:44 it mean to me that there were two different

00:30:49 different testing regimes as you mentioned earlier the one to the british standard that allowed you to um to get a class o and a european

00:31:00 to get a class o and a european testing regime that would allow you to get classification as a b c d etc and that the two were not strictly equivalent right

00:31:17 now let's go back to your witness statement of page two please

00:31:25 and i'd like to look with you at paragraph five uh and

00:31:33 uh and you say uh there that you have had engineering background and then at paragraph seven you say i started to work in the cladding team around the beginning of

00:31:45 cladding team around the beginning of november 2014 and as a new starter i was assigned simpler jobs like reviews and reissues of existing certificates that's when i started to work on the

00:31:56 that's when i started to work on the raynor bond certificate now against that background and by review

00:32:01 review um was that the process of checking an issued certificate one one which had already been issued in order to see if the statements made in it were still valid and correct

00:32:14 in it were still valid and correct yes reviews were carried out on existing certificates

00:32:21 the aim of the review was to check primarily

00:32:25 primarily that the content of the certificate was reflecting the marketing strategy if you like of the company as well as manufacturing

00:32:37 as well as manufacturing data yeah and publish data

00:32:47 just examining that answer a bit more you just you say the aim of the review is to check primarily that the content of the certificate was reflecting the marketing strategy

00:32:57 strategy can you just explain what what you mean there

00:33:01 there it means that first and foremost the aim was to verify that what uh the manufacturer

00:33:12 what uh the manufacturer was selling was exactly what was certified

00:33:15 certified certified and that the the logo used um the vba logo used on the products was used on the right products

00:33:25 products so one of the first things to be checked were the the marketing uh data to verify that there were there was no false claim

00:33:36 no false claim uh for the product false claim for the product made in what in the marketing data or in the certificate uh in both so that there has to be

00:33:50 uh in both so that there has to be direct relationship between what is marketing

00:33:53 marketing marketed and what is in the certificate for example uh there shouldn't be a use of the bba logo on products that are not covered by the certificate likewise the if the bba logo is used

00:34:07 likewise the if the bba logo is used there needs to be a clear reference to the certificate number so that the final user the buyer can relate that product to the certified product

00:34:17 product it sounds from that answer please correct me if i'm wrong that what you're saying is that primarily you were trying to make sure that the manufacturer wasn't using the bba logo to sell products that were not

00:34:29 logo to sell products that were not covered by a bba certificate is that if i got that right that there was one of the aim yes i see but you also say

00:34:40 yes i see but you also say uh that uh an earlier answer that that you were making sure you were verifying that what the manufacturer was selling was exactly what was certified

00:34:54 selling was exactly what was certified is that right yes does that mean that you would check uh to see

00:35:02 to see what was being sold as against the claims being made in respect of that product in the certificate yes would that mean that you would have

00:35:14 yes would that mean that you would have to see

00:35:15 to see the underlying test data and classification reports for what was being sold

00:35:25 that was assumed to have been done already in the initial assessment right we'll come back to that then later on the question i ask gets ahead a little bit but i note that answer we'll come

00:35:36 bit but i note that answer we'll come back to

00:35:37 back to it can we just go back to what you call in paragraph seven the simpler jobs simpler in comparison with what with a

00:35:48 simpler in comparison with what with a brand new assessment i see uh

00:35:54 i see uh the reason i pointed you out to paragraph five is that i was wondering whether you were comparing simpler with the expertise you've had from your uh your degree and your previous experience

00:36:05 your degree and your previous experience did you regard this as a simple job uh no it was referred to primarily the comparison between the complexity of a review over or a

00:36:16 the complexity of a review over or a ratio of an existing certificate as opposed to carrying out a brand new assessment for a new product what was simpler about a review as opposed to

00:36:29 a brand new assessment well for a start there was no assessment of test reports

00:36:40 assessment of test reports right so the the review was structured in a way that um you have to go through um the review of the technical data as i mentioned earlier review of manufacturing um

00:36:54 review of manufacturing um records and review of the wording of the certificate and correctness of references to building regulations and standards

00:37:14 if you got sent a a new certificate sorry a new test report or a new classification report presumably you would have to examine that for the purposes of your review

00:37:25 review in the same way that you would have to do on a brand new review a brand new issue yes with the difference that there would be a distinction between a

00:37:37 there would be a distinction between a a review and a technical view or rather the review would allied whether there is a

00:37:43 a need for a technical reassessment or not and that would be done following the review in a technical issue

00:37:52 issue so the review itself will not touch on those

00:37:58 but during a review if you had a new test

00:38:02 test report or classification report wouldn't you have to scrutinize that and understand it in exactly the same way that you would do if you were doing a brand new issue as i said that would be dealt within the

00:38:15 as i said that would be dealt within the realm of a technical issue so you would allow it

00:38:19 allow it as an outcome of the review that there is a new test data for that certificate for that product and that assessment will be covered as part of their technical issue

00:38:30 technical issue and would you do the technical review as part of the review process of an old certificate well that that is hypothetical right

00:38:43 well that that is hypothetical right well i'm asking you well well is it hypothetical did in your time when you were doing reviews did they never come a time when you were sent brand new test data

00:38:54 test data not at that specific time so when i joined

00:38:58 joined this team the first jobs that i was doing

00:39:01 doing were not dealing with the technical uh aspects

00:39:06 aspects it was only with time that i was given more technical jobs uh hypothetically then supposing in this period late november late 2014

00:39:17 this period late november late 2014 november december uh arconic let's say had sent you a brand new

00:39:22 brand new piece of test data or brand new classification report uh what would you have done with it i would have raised it as part of the review that there was this new test data

00:39:33 there was this new test data and i would have uh mentioned that the assessment of that test data would form part of the following technology and then

00:39:42 then we would have decided who would deal with that technical issue and who would have done the technical managers

00:39:50 managers so that would be uh the team manager and the head of approval would assign that new project to someone that could be me or someone else right i see

00:40:00 see now um it's right a review will happen every three years or at least every three years that's correct and by a reissue as opposed to a review does

00:40:11 a reissue as opposed to a review does that mean a pub an update and republication of the certificate yes that is the ultimate uh outcome now you say a paragraph 46 of your

00:40:23 now you say a paragraph 46 of your statement uh on page nine i didn't even need to see it that by the time you joined the bba iconic was on the annual maintenance fee is that right yeah would that mean that there was an automatic annual review without a fresh

00:40:35 automatic annual review without a fresh review contract uh every three years uh every three a triennial then review every i see but is it right that for a reissue as opposed to a triennial

00:40:47 for a reissue as opposed to a triennial review there was a need for a separate contract to be entered yes there was a separate maintenance scheme

00:40:55 scheme that was covering that but conic was not under that scheme

00:41:00 go back to paragraph 7 which is still on the screen or should be brought back to the screen you refer to uh reviews and reissues

00:41:13 you refer to uh reviews and reissues alike as simpler jobs is it not correct though that as part of a review or a reissue you would need to have

00:41:21 have uh to consider the technical statements made in the certificate yes yes and you would have to have a deep understanding

00:41:32 understanding of all the technical statements made in the certificate yes yes and reviewing a certificate wasn't any simpler was it than

00:41:43 wasn't any simpler was it than uh examining those statements uh at first issue or on reissue

00:41:50 well a first issue is not just about examining the statements but assigning the statements themselves

00:42:00 what do you mean by assigning the statements it means that in in a first brand new assessment you need to assess the test data and then you need to write those

00:42:11 and then you need to write those statements so you need to have a if you like give them a deeper knowledge

00:42:19 but what do you mean by assigning the statements you said a moment ago that at first issue it's not just about examining the statements but assigning the statements yes what do you mean that means that

00:42:30 yes what do you mean that means that you're you're writing a brand new certificate and you're writing for example the fire statement

00:42:37 statement on the basis of the test data and that um statement that you're writing for the fire test

00:42:45 fire test uh data is brand new so it's not just a reaffirmation of something that has been assessed and written already it's a brand new

00:42:55 brand new statement but isn't the purpose of a review

00:42:59 review to check the statement the original statement in the certificate against the up-to-date test data and classification material to make sure that it's still valid and

00:43:10 to make sure that it's still valid and accurate

00:43:12 accurate unless the unless the certificate holder is supplying new test data or

00:43:19 data or they are changing something in the manufacturing

00:43:23 process there is no need to assess new test data when a review comes up you say unless the certificate holder is supplying you with new test data

00:43:38 but what if the manufacturer has new test data

00:43:43 test data you would have to know what that was wouldn't you yes and you would have to ask for it wouldn't you well as i mentioned if the manufacturer

00:43:55 well as i mentioned if the manufacturer the certified supplying it then you don't need to ask for it thank you would you trust the manufacturer to supply it to you or would you ask them

00:44:07 or would you ask them matter of routine no you wouldn't ask if they have a brand new test data what you would ask as part of the review if there has been any change in the manufacturing process or in the

00:44:20 in the manufacturing process or in the in the formulation can we agree at least at this stage that if the manufacturer had uh new test data or

00:44:31 uh new test data or new classification uh that it was essential

00:44:36 essential that you saw that so as to be able so as to enable you to perform the review

00:44:42 review or reissue properly yes but i wouldn't know unless they told me now you started um in the cladding team in november 2014

00:44:56 um in the cladding team in november 2014 and we know um that your first correspondence in relation to the reynabond product was in december 2014. we're going to come to that is it right that the review on the renault bond 55 certificate

00:45:07 certificate was one of the first cladding certificates that you worked on at the bba

00:45:12 bba that's correct did your team manager at the time

00:45:15 the time check the work you were doing on that certificate yes when i started to work on it yes were you told how to go about doing a review

00:45:27 how to go about doing a review yes who gave you that instruction so the training i received on the procedures was done where i was in the other

00:45:39 was done where i was in the other department previously

00:45:44 i see and in relation to this particular review did you get any particular instruction from your team manager as to how to go

00:45:55 from your team manager as to how to go about

00:45:55 about the radar bomb certificate review no there was a final reason to believe that there would be a different procedure

00:46:03 procedure i see um can you give us an idea of how many review or reissue or assessment jobs you would be doing at any one time um i i couldn't i couldn't go

00:46:14 um i i couldn't i couldn't go did you have targets to meet yes can you explain how those targets were um

00:46:21 um calculated what were they so there was um a minimum number of project hours that i would need to book per month up in here

00:46:32 in here and uh they were set based on on the experience so a new starter will have a lower target

00:46:39 target target than an experienced project manager

00:46:42 manager i see and what was your in the period november 2014 to april 2015 what was your minimum project hours target do you

00:46:53 minimum project hours target do you remember

00:46:54 remember i cannot recall i remember that i wasn't assigned a target for a long time because of the transfer between departments and the fact that i didn't have a formal

00:47:05 have a formal uh team manager at the time so it was a few months until i received my i i got my target set and do you remember roughly when your targets were set

00:47:15 set you know unfortunately i don't remember and uh

00:47:20 and uh would there be um an incentive uh personal incentive to you to meet those targets

00:47:28 targets um no not really it was part of the job you say part of the job

00:47:35 the job what happened if you failed to meet your targets

00:47:40 um i never never never happened so did anybody tell you what would happen if you didn't meet your targets

00:47:52 if you didn't meet your targets well you'd need to to meet them and make up for

00:47:56 up for for those targets somehow so there was a time where we were asked to do some overtime to go before the additional hours that were not covered

00:48:08 covered what i'm really getting at is was there um a career incentive to meet the targets

00:48:14 targets not exclusively no right not explicitly was there a financial incentive to meet the targets no that wasn't a bonus was there an increase in your salary if you met

00:48:26 an increase in your salary if you met the targets

00:48:28 no not beyond just doing your job

00:48:35 job now i just want to ask you one or two questions about um the difference between surveillance and reviews

00:48:41 reviews am i right in thinking that surveillance would typically occur twice a year by a technical assessor visiting a factory

00:48:48 factory that's correct and the technical assessor would look at factory production and factory production specifically yes and does that mean that they would monitor production against an agreed

00:48:59 monitor production against an agreed quality plan correct and is that different from a periodic review of the certificate itself uh yes it's the ongoing maintenance

00:49:12 uh yes it's the ongoing maintenance yes uh and as part of surveillance or or review whose job would it be to examine current fire performance data in respect of the given product

00:49:24 in respect of the given product the project manager the project manager not the technical assessor yeah now

00:49:32 yeah now i'm going to go to the bba certificate with you this is a bba 6047 please

00:49:43 i just want to show you what it says and and i'm not going to read it all out aloud to you because there's quite a lot of text but i'm just going to ask you to look at it um to see whether it's something you

00:49:55 um to see whether it's something you remember um this is a agreement certificate number zero eight uh stroke four five one zero uh and in the dark blue banner you can see product sheet one rayna bond

00:50:06 product sheet one rayna bond architecture wall cladding panels and if you go to the bottom of the page or bottom of the screen first page you can see that it's signed off on the 14th of january 2008 and just above that still on the

00:50:18 2008 and just above that still on the screen you can see key factors assessed third item done behavior in relation to fire

00:50:23 fire in relation to the building regulations for reaction to fire the panels may be regarded as having a class naught surface in england and wales and a low-risk material in scotland c-section six

00:50:34 c-section six and if we look at page three there's a blue header technical specification uh in the middle of the screen there and you can see description uh renderbot architecture wall cladding

00:50:46 uh renderbot architecture wall cladding panels comprise two half millimeters thick aluminium alloy sheets etc bonded to either side of a core of low density polyethylene ldpe the panels are available either plain

00:50:57 the panels are available either plain edge riveted system or flanged cassette system to suit architectural requirements see figure one duragloss people pvdf coating available in various colors protects the exposed

00:51:08 in various colors protects the exposed face

00:51:08 face polyester primer protects the unexposed face products are also available in a fire

00:51:14 fire retardant grade fr and if you look um below at the very bottom of the screen you can see figure one can we have the helmet figure one on the on the screen please you can see

00:51:27 uh there it is rainer bond architecture panels and typical fixing systems on the left you've got the riveted system on the right you've got the cassette system and then if you turn to page five you'll

00:51:38 and then if you turn to page five you'll see section six to which reference is made on the first page uh and uh under behavior in relation to file there's a large gray block of text comprising six sub sections uh and i'll just show

00:51:51 six sub sections uh and i'll just show you the first um three in particular 6.1 a standard sample of the product with a gray green duragloss by a thousand coating when tested for reaction to fire achieved a classification of b s two d

00:52:03 achieved a classification of b s two d naught in accordance with e m 13501 part 1 2002

00:52:07 1 2002 a fire retardant sample of the product with a gold colored duragloss finish when tested for reaction to fire achieved a classification bs1d naught in accordance with en 13501 2002.

00:52:19 accordance with en 13501 2002. a fire retardant sample of the product with a metallic gray pvdf finish when tested in accordance with bs 476.6 1989 achieved a firepropagation index i have naught and when tested in

00:52:30 i have naught and when tested in accordance with bs 476 part 7 1997 achieved class 1 surface spread of flame 6.3 says as a consequence of section 6.1 and 6.2 the products may be regarded as

00:52:43 and 6.2 the products may be regarded as having a class naught surface in relation to the approved document b of the building regulations 2000 as amended england and wales a technical booklet e of the building regulations northern ireland

00:52:54 regulations northern ireland 2000 as amended and a low-risk material as defined in our next 2c and annex 2e of the building scotland regulations 2004 as amended

00:53:02 amended the unexposed side of the products may also be regarded as having a class naught surface and then 6.4 deals with colors

00:53:10 colors 6.5 deals with resistance to fire uh and 6.6 deals with cavity barriers now i'm just i'm showing you all of that there's more obviously in it than just the these passages i've shown

00:53:22 than just the these passages i've shown you but my overall question is would you have read this in detail when you started your work in your review on this of this certificate

00:53:33 certificate uh i would have read it i would have probably not have the knowledge to recognize the shortfalls in these statements

00:53:46 all right well we'll come back to that as well perhaps a little later when we do come to your review can we take a run up as it were to this by looking at the previous reviews that have happened in relation to the

00:53:57 have happened in relation to the certificate before you arrived do you remember that there was a review there had been a review in 2011 yes and that the project manager at the

00:54:08 yes and that the project manager at the time who conducted that review was alfie milota is that right correct the best of mine

00:54:14 mine uh yeah that's very important can we look at your witness statement then please page six paragraph 33

00:54:27 the question uh above that is at each review what use does the project manager make of the technical dossier that is compiled at the first review of the certificate and your answer is where necessary the

00:54:39 and your answer is where necessary the project manager would review the original assessment data for comparison against the data supplied as part of the review

00:54:45 review this is particularly relevant when a change in the manufacturing procedure is found that would require partial or full reassessment also if changes in the standards referenced in the certificate are highlighted

00:54:56 highlighted the pm would check the standard version against which the product was originally tested before updating the references in the certificate do i take it from that that you would have had access to the

00:55:08 you would have had access to the technical file compiled at original issue

00:55:11 issue when doing your review yes that was available and do i take it that you

00:55:18 you uh would only review that uh file where necessary

00:55:23 necessary as you say at the very beginning of this paragraph yeah and you say that that would be particularly say where there had been a change in manufacturing procedure or change in the standards highlighted yes

00:55:36 change in the standards highlighted yes yes

00:55:37 yes um would that mean that for example if the building regulations had changed or fire safety standards had changed you would

00:55:44 would go back and look at the technical file yes

00:55:47 yes and likewise if uh the british or european standards that are used for testing had changed was it necessary to use your word

00:56:00 was it necessary to use your word to look at the technical dossier technical file in any other situation well as you mentioned earlier if a manufacturer was to supply new data new testing data

00:56:13 was to supply new data new testing data then you would have to refer to the original assessment to compare the two

00:56:21 can we then go to look at paragraph b in bold underneath para 33 where the question is asked by the inquiry what use does the project manager make of information gathered in

00:56:33 manager make of information gathered in previous reviews such as documentation provided by the certificate holder and bba reports and a paragraph 34 you say the pm would normally review the findings of the previous review

00:56:45 previous review and check that any inconsistency or irregularities are not re-emerging as part of the current review and then if we can scroll up please

00:56:56 previous reviews are generally useful to understand if there is any specific trend

00:57:01 trend the pm should watch out for as part of the review do i understand from that that you would look at the file for the previous review yes

00:57:13 for the previous review yes and in that case or in this case i should say in november december 2014 that would be mr milota's 2011 review yes and can you explain what you mean in

00:57:26 yes and can you explain what you mean in paragraph 34 then by uh checking that inconsistencies and irregularities are not emerging um what used to happen sometimes is that

00:57:39 um what used to happen sometimes is that there were issues in the in the manufacturing for example or i don't know some records not being available at the time of the

00:57:50 of the surveillance was done and if that was happening

00:57:54 happening regularly then that was something that had to

00:57:57 had to be actioned on so you're referring there to

00:58:01 to inconsistencies or irregularities that would come out of the technical surveillance at the factory against the quality plan that could be one of the cases or it could be

00:58:12 could be a consistent

00:58:16 mistake if you want in the marketing data or it could be something that the 30 year old would do consistently against

00:58:27 against the guidelines of bba do you have any independent recollection as you sit there today looking at any particular documents from the 2011 review

00:58:39 no i don't remember let's look at the technical file for that review it's a bba

00:58:48 408044

00:58:57 and can we go to page 35 in that document please in that document run this is a letter page 35

00:59:08 document run this is a letter page 35 from

00:59:15 yes that's it it's dated the 16th of february 2011 and it's from alfie milota who was the project manager doing the 2011 review to bridget gross at alcoa

00:59:27 to bridget gross at alcoa and he makes a request and he says let's look at it together this refers to bba contract number s146895 in order to progress the current review of your bub certificate

00:59:38 review of your bub certificate you can see the certificate in the heading of the letter i'd be grateful if i could if if could provide the following information a list of 15 uk contacts uh and then two regarding factory

00:59:51 uh and then two regarding factory production control please provide a letter of confirmation from cstb with full details of any any or no changes to following relating to a raw materials b the manufacturing

01:00:02 to a raw materials b the manufacturing process

01:00:02 process c quality control procedure three a copy of your most recent technical literature stroke brochure in the uk four list of customer complaints

01:00:14 customer complaints if any relating to product quality for the projects in the uk and action taken to resolve them five an estimate of the volume of production per annum for each product or system

01:00:23 system for the uk market six recent copies of completed quality control sheets for the manufacturer of the product seven copies of any licensed documents relevant to the products or production locations bsen

01:00:36 products or production locations bsen iso 9000 series certificates um would that have been a standard form letter that a project manager would send out to the manufacturer as part of a review uh

01:00:49 as part of a review uh more or less meaning that 0.6 and 7 might be omitted in light of the fact that they would be checked by the assessor in the factory

01:01:01 checked by the assessor in the factory go to page 33 if we go there you can see her response on the 11th of april 2011. age 33

01:01:13 and she sends back uh various things and you can see a list of uk customers letter and certificate from the cstb

01:01:22 the cstb rayner bond brochure list of customer complaints copies of certificates and estimated volume of production it looks from that that this gross has responded exactly as mr blotter had asked her

01:01:33 asked her yes um

01:01:36 yes um yeah broadly yes now let's look at the review report that was issued for this report

01:01:41 report that's at bba three zeros one zero eight one zero

01:01:53 one zero uh you can see that the the footer at the bottom um this is the review uh document it's the review report uh with um a reference

01:02:06 with um a reference uh and you can see the signatures there on the page uh alfie milota prepares it as project manager and it's signed off by brian chamberlain dated the 23rd and 24th of june respectively

01:02:17 respectively and in the gray box above it you can see uh

01:02:20 uh if we just have the hold of the grey box so we can see the whole thing um there's a summary the agreement certificate zero eight stroke four five one zero

01:02:31 zero eight stroke four five one zero remains valid action required by the client none the next scheduled review date is 15th of january

01:02:37 january 2014. amendments indicated in section 3 raymond three need to be incorporated in the next reissue now when you came to do your review in late 2014

01:02:47 late 2014 samurais did you notice uh that um but did you see this document first of all

01:02:54 of all yes you did did you notice that date 15th of january 2014 was the next scheduled review date yeah does that mean that the next review had to be completed by that date or started

01:03:05 to be completed by that date or started by that date uh that should have been started by that date

01:03:11 date that's a start date is it right i see so when you came to your review does that mean that you were a level the bba was about 11 months late yes as i stated in my eyewitness

01:03:23 yes as i stated in my eyewitness statement yes did you inquire why that was the case yes

01:03:28 yes what was the reason the previous project manager

01:03:33 manager had picked up uh the review um and had tried

01:03:37 tried to reach out the certificate holder in several occasions with no success then this project manager

01:03:45 manager left were rearrangements in the bba until the the project then came to me so that's why the delay

01:03:57 and if it if it was started in late late 2014 when should it have been completed by

01:04:07 uh at the time uh the reviews i mean the review for iconic was still following the same procedure that was used for the review that we have on screen now so

01:04:19 the review that we have on screen now so that

01:04:19 that was um carrying out the review within six months six months so if it had been started in started on january the 15th 2014 it should have been finished

01:04:31 15th 2014 it should have been finished mid june 2014. correct so in fact you were about six months behind yeah i see now um the previous person at the bva with responsibility for this

01:04:43 at the bva with responsibility for this was i think maria barbato is that right yeah i see now let's look at let's look and and see what happened to this review um is it right that it's review number s1

01:04:53 s1 straight five three seven two nine is that number ring of l and i don't remember the exact number well let's let's um let's let's run through the documents can we go uh first please to bba

01:05:09 can we go uh first please to bba 408089

01:05:17 this is an email from maria barbato to claude schmidt at alcoa iconic relating to review s153729

01:05:28 review s153729 uh review of certificate zero eight stroke four five one zero see that uh and she says dear mr schmidt the review of your agreement certificate

01:05:39 the review of your agreement certificate zero eight four five one zero is now due and i'm pleased to inform you that i've been assigned as project manager please find attached an initial letter with relevant information and a draft quality plan for you to complete

01:05:50 plan for you to complete further explanations are given in the initial letter now just pausing there first of all is this a document that you would have seen um or did see

01:06:01 that you would have seen um or did see when you started work on your review of this certificate in the november or december of 2014 more than a year later um if it was saved in the project folder

01:06:14 um if it was saved in the project folder i would have seen it so it was and i'm casting all mine back do you recall reviewing the correspondence in the project folder at the time you started your review

01:06:25 your review yes yes now you can see from this email that she's attached something a bba project letter and a draft quality plan

01:06:34 plan let's go to the letter that's a bb-8408090

01:06:42 now you can see from that date of the 8th of october it's actually sent on the 9th in fact by the email we've just seen um and the subject is the assessment

01:06:53 um and the subject is the assessment s153729 review of bba grammar certificate i'm pleased to inform you she says that i've been assigned as project manager for the review of your agreement certificate zero eight four five one zero preliminary work on the above is about

01:07:04 preliminary work on the above is about to commence and i wish to provide you with

01:07:07 with relevant contact information contact details information data you need to and then submit goes on to say uh a little bit uh lower down

01:07:20 you have the full screen

01:07:23 uh roles responsibilities and she explains who those are what that is and then if we go to page two

01:07:32 two uh halfway down page two we can see towards the bottom she asks for submission of data and she says there under that heading can you see she says it is necessary for the bba to

01:07:43 she says it is necessary for the bba to be supplied with the following information in order to carry out the review of your agreement certificate zero eight four five one zero one it's our normal practice to conduct a written survey of users of the product

01:07:55 users of the product could you therefore please provide details of a minimum of 10 major installers and 10 major users of stone light cladding panels who can be contacted to establish the practicability of installation and performance in use

01:08:09 uh and then uh underneath that item two uh written confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification context of use or other

01:08:20 specification context of use or other details that would invalidate certificate alternatively please specify any changes and then three regarding factory production control please supply full details of any changes

01:08:32 details of any changes to and raw materials is at the bottom and over the page manufacturing process you just go over the page

01:08:40 the page manufacturing process that's b and c quality control procedure four copies of your current uk technical literature and installation instructions relating to the product

01:08:51 to the product five a list of customer complaints etc six

01:08:55 six an estimate of the annual volume of production etc and seven recent copies of typical production straight quality control records

01:09:04 so that's what she sends to uh claude schmidt at iconic can we then go to bba

01:09:10 to bba four zero eight zero eight five

01:09:16 and uh i should just say zamasu i'm just gonna take you through a run of documents before we come to some questions

01:09:22 questions this is an email from maria barbato to celine antal at our comic that now 21st of october 2013 dear miss antel i sent below the email

01:09:33 dear miss antel i sent below the email to mr schmidt regarding the review of your agreement certificate the reynold architectural panels and i got no response would you please be able to forward it to the relevant person in the company

01:09:44 relevant person in the company uh can we now go next to bba408092 page 2 of that document

01:09:54 get page 2 in that please

01:09:59 that second email down timed page two please second email down timed.0658 from celine ernie that's

01:10:11 celine ernie that's uh celine antel's married name it's the same person and she says hello maria barbato i forward your request to claude verlais the technical contact and you can see that claude verle is actually copied uh to celine ernie's

01:10:24 actually copied uh to celine ernie's email there 23rd of october so two days later

01:10:27 later then if we scroll up to the bottom of page one there's an email at the bottom of that page um from uh maria barbato took lord vale 29th of november now so the end of the following month 2013.

01:10:40 so the end of the following month 2013. dear mr verdi regarding the emails below which refers to the review of your bba certificate zero eight four five one zero when do you think you'll be able to provide the requested information please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any queries

01:10:53 then if we scroll up to the top of the page

01:10:57 page we now get two weeks later uh maria barbato 13th of december 2013 to celine ernie at arconic darceline i've tried to contact mr verde see email below but i'm

01:11:09 contact mr verde see email below but i'm not getting any answer we really need to progress the review of your certificate now do you think you can provide me with another contact or a telephone number for mr verde so i can call him directly

01:11:19 directly thanks in advance for your help kind of regards maria barbato then if we go to bba 4080 at the top of that

01:11:31 at the top of that page we can see an email from ms barbato to club verlais now dated the 10th of february 2014 uh dear mr verle i hope you have already received the initial letter attached with the required information

01:11:43 attached with the required information for the review of your certificate see my previous emails below i've tried to call you as well but i understand you're away from the office for a few days please contact me on your return as soon as possible so we can discuss the information requested

01:11:55 can discuss the information requested kind regards maria barbato then we go next to bba 408095

01:12:07 there's an email sent 18 days later by maria above eight o'clock valet 28th of february 2014. you can see the email i've just read you at the bottom of that of the page at the top of the page we can see

01:12:18 top of the page we can see a further email dear mr valley i've tried to call you again today but you were not available would you please confirm that you are receiving my emails and if you have time please give me a call back thanks very much in advance thank you very much in advance

01:12:32 now when you came into this project and conducted your review in late 2014 uh did you read this email string or set of emails that i've shown you on the

01:12:43 of emails that i've shown you on the technical file yes did you notice that ms barbato had by the end of february 2014 chased our comic no fewer than five

01:12:54 chased our comic no fewer than five times following the first request on the 9th of october 2013 to get the information required for the certificate review yeah what do you make of that

01:13:07 well i could only assume that we either had the

01:13:11 had the wrong contact uh person or uh someone on the other side didn't want to engage with us which wasn't uncommon when we were doing reviews

01:13:22 right so you suspected that that stage

01:13:29 at least as part of your thinking that arconic didn't want to engage with you is that right that was one of the possibilities did you have a reason

01:13:39 reason at that stage for thinking why that would be

01:13:45 it just happened with a few certificate holders that they wouldn't take the reviews uh very seriously

01:13:54 seriously or maybe that sometimes the contact person that we had uh wasn't really aware of the the processes of bba

01:14:06 aware of the the processes of bba and therefore wasn't very responsive there could have been several reasons why i wouldn't receive a response

01:14:15 response okay uh mr chairman it's shortly before 11 15. i i've got about five minutes more questions on this line before turning to a different topic

01:14:24 topic um i'm in your hands as to whether we stop now or whether we continue to a more convenient point um well is this an inconvenient point from your perspective um it would be more convenient for me to

01:14:37 um it would be more convenient for me to continue for five minutes we could manage another five minutes yes um can we then go to bba thank you mr chairman can we go to bba four four zero eight nine seven one

01:14:53 now this is an email from maria barbato to claude velle dated the 7th of may 2014.

01:15:01 2014. uh if we go to

01:15:06 the top of the page there yes and you can see she says dear mr verde have you been able to collect any of the information requested in previous emails for the review of your certificate would you please contact me and give me

01:15:17 would you please contact me and give me an approximate date when you'll be able to provide this information as you know the three yearly review is a requirement for the continuity of the validity of the bba certificate and then if we go on to bba 408954

01:15:30 and then if we go on to bba 408954 we see another email again from maria barbato to claude verlais dated now 18th july 2014 so we're now some uh

01:15:44 so we're now some uh eight or nine months on from her original request in october 2013. she attaches a draft quality plan and she says it dear claude it was nice

01:15:55 and she says it dear claude it was nice speaking to you as discussed over the phone i will liaise with my colleague who's dealing with the certificate 808 uh stroke 1964.

01:16:06 uh stroke 1964. and we'll combine try to combine the factory visit for both certificates into one what was that certificate do you know what that certificate was about um i presume it was

01:16:18 um i presume it was about the renault uh coating so if i remember correctly it was either the coating itself or the coated sheet of aluminium and then lower down the email she says

01:16:29 the email she says also i will need the following information to progress the review of the certificate and she sets out of some numbered paragraphs one uh the details of the ten major installers again that was a repeat of the request

01:16:42 again that was a repeat of the request you'd made in the october of the previous year two written confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification context of use or other details

01:16:53 details that would invalidate the certificate alternatively please specify any changes just note that three copies of your current uk technical literature and installation instructions related to the product

01:17:05 instructions related to the product now i i want you to bear in mind very cl closely that those three requests but particularly the one made at paragraph two because we'll come back to it in due

01:17:17 two because we'll come back to it in due course

01:17:18 course but again when you did your review of the correspondence when you conducted your review and you came to it in later

01:17:26 in later later in that year did you notice that these requests have been made in these terms of mr verde by ms barbato yes

01:17:38 of mr verde by ms barbato yes and we know there was a surveillance visit on the 10th of september 2014 a couple of months later

01:17:47 and

01:17:50 we perhaps don't need to see that but just note that note the date

01:17:56 perhaps i should just show you one thing from it bba 3-0 is one zero eight seven three

01:18:10 uh and on that uh page and page on that on that page we see the first page of the review and you can see the date 10th of september 2014

01:18:22 september 2014 and if we turn the page to page 2 you can see a comment inspector's comment

01:18:29 comment uh you can see uh five paragraphs done it says the client stated today can you see that

01:18:39 see that uh yes the client stated today that they have tried to communicate several times with bba to discuss the upcoming review but as yet have had no acknowledgement or communication from their bba project

01:18:50 or communication from their bba project manager

01:18:51 manager the client in particular claude verlay technical manager would like the relevant bba project manager to contact him as soon as possible regarding the issue of this certificate his contact details are as follows

01:19:02 his contact details are as follows when you came into the review did you see this

01:19:05 see this inspection report and note that comment uh i don't remember right now i remember

01:19:16 mr chairman that might be a convenient moment

01:19:19 moment yes very well well this summer we'll have a

01:19:22 have a short break now we'll resume at uh 25 to 12 please and i have to ask you please

01:19:30 please now and on future occasions when we have breaks please don't talk about your evidence

01:19:34 evidence or anything to do with it to anyone else during the break all right very good we'll see you in 15 minutes thank you

01:35:21 welcome back everyone we're now ready to continue hearing from miss summeroso i'll just check that she's there and can see me and hear me clearly hello miss amoroso you there yes very

01:35:32 hello miss amoroso you there yes very good thank you very much you're ready to carry on

01:35:35 carry on yes very good thank you then i'll ask mr millet to

01:35:38 millet to put some more questions to you when you're ready mr millet thank you mr chairman uh miss amarezo when you

01:35:45 when you uh first started working on this review uh

01:35:48 uh in early december 2014 uh were you aware of the volume of correspondence from the bba to arconic chasing up on the questions ms barbato had asked

01:35:59 questions ms barbato had asked yes and in your admittedly limited experience at that time was that sort of amount of chasing uh usual or unusual

01:36:10 uh usual or unusual uh it was it wasn't really usual did you ask your line manager about it yes what did he say

01:36:21 yes what did he say that i should try again or otherwise we would try to find an alternative way to to understand who was the right person to conduct right now as we've established before

01:36:33 right now as we've established before the break by the time you picked up the project

01:36:36 project of reviewing this certificate that uh project uh was essentially six months uh behind uh you told us you were aware of that fact

01:36:47 of that fact my question is was there any discussion within the bba um about the significance of it being six months behind um not on this specific project but there were discussions about

01:36:59 there were discussions about um how long the reviews were taking at the time right was there any con discussion or consideration that you were involved uh with about suspending the certificate

01:37:12 uh with about suspending the certificate because

01:37:13 because um the questions have not been answered uh no not that not that i remember no right now let's go to your introduction

01:37:24 right now let's go to your introduction to this review can we start by looking please together at bba3010550

01:37:43 this is an email chain on the 1st and 2nd of december 2014 between you and prayer nakomo and if we go to the bottom of page two

01:37:59 we can see that uh there's an email from you to prayer the como first of december 2014.

01:38:08 2014. you see and he says so you say hi prayer this is the contact person

01:38:14 person for alcoa architectural products sas job number s one stroke five three seven two nine

01:38:21 two nine that's the job number claude verlay technical manager and then you set out his email address and some other uh contact details sorry for leaving you in the position of contacting them and then there's an

01:38:32 contacting them and then there's an unsmiling case at that stage have you been appointed as project manager for the rayner bond certificate uh yes and your line manager on that project formerly i think wasn't prana

01:38:45 project formerly i think wasn't prana komo

01:38:47 komo but he was i don't believe at the time he had been appointed yet but right um praying a coma at that stage was a was another project manager wasn't he

01:39:00 another project manager wasn't he yes so he was essentially in parallel with you

01:39:03 with you in terms of seniority is that right well he had

01:39:07 he had more he had more experience within bba than me for sure and it looks as if he had agreed to call claude verne at iconic is that is that correct yes

01:39:19 is that is that correct yes uh do you know why prana como called claude verde and not you i believe i don't remember exactly what

01:39:30 i believe i don't remember exactly what brought us to this email chain but i believe i either tried to contact unsuccessfully uh the client um or we decided to to do the first contact uh

01:39:44 we decided to to do the first contact uh by a more experienced person like him in in light of the previous emails that were unresponded

01:39:53 can we go to met3053158 underscore p18 p18 page four

01:40:04 this is claude vale's exhibit part 18 page four

01:40:09 page four and it's an email uh from premier como to claude verlais dated the second of december 2014 copied to you

01:40:19 to you samurai and he says dear claude verlet thank you for taking my call earlier this afternoon i note the following issues we discussed then the first is factory visits and

01:40:31 then the first is factory visits and then the second under paragraph two is this and he says outstanding information for the review of bba certificate zero eight straight four five one zero under contract s one stroke five three

01:40:43 under contract s one stroke five three seven two nine my colleague maria barbato has had asked for the information a number of times you indicated you provided information to the inspector who visited the factory and therefore did not respond to maria's emails as you considered

01:40:55 emails as you considered maria's request addressed unfortunately the information provided to the inspectors during their factory audit is different

01:41:02 different to the one required for the review of the certificate as requested by maria thank uh thank you that you have agreed to send this information if we can send you the list again my colleague valentina amarozzo

01:41:13 colleague valentina amarozzo who took over the review job s153729 after maria left the bba we'll send you an email with a reminder of what information we require this will enable her to complete the review of

01:41:25 enable her to complete the review of your certificate zero eight straight four five one zero if you have any queries please do not hesitate to comment to contact valentina who will email you shortly uh

01:41:36 who will email you shortly uh now let's um go to bba

01:41:44 408098 is your email the same day

01:41:51 a little bit later on that day at 16 14 16 17 to claude verlet and you say dear mr vernae when you set

01:42:02 and you say dear mr vernae when you set out the project number and the certificate number my name is valentina amarozzo and i have been designated as the new project manager responsible for coordinating the review of your bba

01:42:13 coordinating the review of your bba certificate zero eight stroke four five one zero following on from your conversation with my colleague pere nicomo please find the list of information required to complete the review report

01:42:24 required to complete the review report and then you set out a number of uh uh details in numbered paragraphs uh uh and under under item two you say

01:42:35 uh and under under item two you say written confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification context of use or other details that would invalidate the certificate or to alternatively please specify any changes

01:42:46 changes and then three regarding factory production control please supply full details of any changes underlined to raw materials

01:42:54 materials manufacturing process quality control procedure and then four at the bottom of the screen there copies of your current uk technical literature and installation instructions relating

01:43:03 relating to the product so this looks as if this was a response to mr nakomo telling you to resend the request

01:43:15 request is that right yes we as far as i remember we agreed that we would follow up with a reminder to the client to the exact information that we required and where did you get that wording from

01:43:27 and where did you get that wording from that uh formed the request that we can see you sent to mr verde that was a pretty much a pro forma that everyone used at vba

01:43:41 pro forma that everyone used at vba right was it a pro forma on a system or did you take that directly from the email that miss barbato had sent in most lately july 2014 that we saw at bba

01:43:52 most lately july 2014 that we saw at bba four zeros eight nine five four uh there wasn't a typical as far as i remember there was an um a template for it uh

01:44:03 um a template for it uh but everyone was using the same wording more or less with purity now let's go to paragraph 51 of your statement please on page 10.

01:44:23 um you say on under uh the question uh uh d you give your answer a paragraph 51. the question at d is it appears that in december 2014 you

01:44:35 is it appears that in december 2014 you noticed

01:44:35 noticed there had been no communication from the son

01:44:39 son cstb on their surveillance one how did you discover this and you say as part of my review work i started to look for the latest inspection reports for certificate zero eight straight four five one zero

01:44:51 eight straight four five one zero and since i couldn't find anything in any of the project folders for that certificate i asked our inspection team for their separate records if any i did find out that there was no record of cstb surveillance reports in our system and we decided to set up

01:45:03 system and we decided to set up our own surveillances from that moment onwards please refer to email chain between myself and alexandra hughes on dated 8th december 2014. now we saw earlier that there had been a

01:45:16 now we saw earlier that there had been a one-off surveillance visit by sean o'neill on the 10th of september 2014. was that uh uh surveillance visit um set up just for this review or was

01:45:27 um set up just for this review or was that happening anyway uh was uh part of the review as part was part of the review and do you remember that it was about this time 2000 december 2014 that you

01:45:39 this time 2000 december 2014 that you queried the arrangements with the cstb internally within the bba yes and is it right that as far as you could

01:45:49 could see the bba hadn't heard from the cstb about this product between 2008 and september 2014

01:46:01 and september 2014 yes i couldn't find greg

01:46:04 did it strike you at the time that that had left a big gap in the bba's knowledge

01:46:13 knowledge yes what did you do about that well as i stated in my um in my statement i did try to set up our

01:46:24 in my statement i did try to set up our own surveillances with a with a new quality plan in place did you discuss that gap with mr nakomo or mr chamberlain yes what did either of them tell you

01:46:40 yes what did either of them tell you they told me that that that was the approach we should have taken i see did either of them say to you that you should go back to iconic and press them

01:46:51 iconic and press them for whether they'd done any new tests on the material or products covered by the certificate or had any

01:46:59 had any new classification reports no that wasn't that wasn't a standard request

01:47:08 request summarizing the documents without me going to them do you agree that uh between early december 2014 and early january 2015 you communicated

01:47:19 and early january 2015 you communicated with our conic particularly claude velle and lilia koschuk

01:47:24 koschuk about the quality plan yes and you got an agreed and signed quality plan yes after after the christmas break yeah yes and is it right that

01:47:36 yes and is it right that as you recall it none of the contents of the quality plan that was signed off and agreed related to fire test data yeah so you agree with me that it didn't

01:47:48 yeah so you agree with me that it didn't yes yes i understand did the fact that you got a signed quality plan back from arconic influence how hard thereafter

01:47:59 influence how hard thereafter you pressed arconic on outstanding requests for data yes in what way well i i don't remember the exact

01:48:13 well i i don't remember the exact emails uh but i remember that there had to be

01:48:18 to be a few back and forth to try to uh nail down what had to go in the quality plan and was beyond discover the certificate

01:48:30 yes did the fact that you had a signed quality plan mean that you've men made less effort to get

01:48:37 get far test data or other raw data out of arconic thereafter yes first test data were not uh part of the surveillances so it wasn't part of the

01:48:49 surveillances so it wasn't part of the quality plan itself but generally having a quality plan in place would allow us to have the control on the manufacturing in essence

01:48:58 essence and so to to have a view on whether there was

01:49:01 there was or not any change in the manufacturing process

01:49:05 process did anybody guide you or tell you at the bba that even though you had a quality plan now agreed with arconic you still had to push as hard as you had

01:49:16 you still had to push as hard as you had been pushing for all other data test reports test data particularly relating to fire safety

01:49:23 safety there wasn't as part of the review a specific request to ask for test data the only occasion where we would receive test data is whether

01:49:34 data is whether the client wanted to send newer test reports

01:49:38 reports or whether after the review we had to ask for new test data following changes in the manufacturing let's see now um at the same time as the quality

01:49:51 now um at the same time as the quality plan was being agreed you sent other emails about the other information that arconic was supposed to send you yes yes can we go to bba 408079 please

01:50:09 and a page three of that email run

01:50:14 which is what this is uh you you page three you see that there's an email from you uh to lilia koschuk on the 18th of december 2014

01:50:27 uh at 9 47 and you say hi lilia this is the email i was talking about on the phone i wait forward to hear from you soon

01:50:35 you soon best wishes for christmas and for the new year to come and then if we go down to page four we can see that it's your second of december request for information that we saw earlier that you had sent

01:50:47 that we saw earlier that you had sent following mr nokomo's conversation with mr

01:50:51 mr verlet that afternoon yes yes yes now let's go up to the first email on page three of this email run

01:51:02 we saw that there was an email from you before christmas 18th of december this is an email on the 7th of january 2015 now

01:51:10 2015 now also to lilia kostchuk copy to claude verle

01:51:13 verle and you say hi lilia thank you for the wishes and for having sent me the signed copy of the agp promptly and the agp is the is that the quality performance uh the agreed quality plan the agreed

01:51:25 uh the agreed quality plan the agreed quality plan i just want to remind you that we are still waiting for the missing information to close the review of your certificate i enclosed in the following the emails that i sent you and mr verley last year

01:51:36 that i sent you and mr verley last year i'd be very appreciative if you could send the required information by 21st of january

01:51:41 january so that i could work on closing this job i wait forward to hear from you soon now you could see that you imposed a deadline of the 21st of january was

01:51:52 a deadline of the 21st of january was that deadline something that you yourself had thought of or was that a deadline that had been given to you by one of your seniors at the bba

01:52:01 the bba um i cannot recall this particularly right do you remember why you imposed the deadline of the 21st of january well the as you mentioned earlier uh the

01:52:13 well the as you mentioned earlier uh the the review have been going on for quite a long time so we had to close it at some point and going back if i can to page four of the same email run just to

01:52:26 of the same email run just to pick this up and re-remind you of it really one of the

01:52:32 classes of information that you were pressing for at that time under paragraph two was and i'll read it again written confirmation that there have been no

01:52:43 confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification context of use or other details

01:52:47 details that would invalidate the certificate alternatively please specify any changes so that that is something is it right that at this point 7th of

01:52:58 is it right that at this point 7th of january 2015 you want an answer to by the 21st of january

01:53:04 january yes now let's go back uh up to page two second email on that page please

01:53:14 we can see at the bottom of the screen there's an email from you on the 12th of january 2015 to lilia koscherk hi lilia as for the previous emails we're still

01:53:26 as for the previous emails we're still waiting for the missing info to close the review could you please provide them by the 20th of this month um now it looks from that as if you chased

01:53:35 chased them in the middle of this period and then brought your own deadline forward a day why was that

01:53:43 it might might have been because very 21st was happening in a weekend i don't know did you was it you had another think about it and brought it forward or was there a discussion within the bba that led to

01:53:55 discussion within the bba that led to you sending this email with the revised um a revised deadline no i don't think there was a discussion had matters become urgent

01:54:06 had matters become urgent but it was urgent because it had been a year then

01:54:09 year then we have been working on this review without finalizing it yes now this time lilia kostchuk does respond if you go up to the first email on the page you can see

01:54:21 on the page you can see that the same day she comes back to you 12th of january 15 and copied to claude verlais and and somebody else uh and she says hi valentina as requested please find here below the information needed

01:54:33 information needed primary marketing contact celine ernie primary technical contact and accounts finance department claude now that wasn't what you were after was it no

01:54:43 it no you'd ask the detailed information not just the contact you already knew these contacts didn't you uh

01:54:50 you uh yes both of them uh

01:54:55 yes what what was what did you think when

01:54:58 when you got this response from the leo cost chuck

01:55:02 i assumed she wanted me to redirect the queries

01:55:06 queries to these people

01:55:09 but but but claude verily had already had those queries haven't you yes because he was copied in on on your emails previously including the one on the 7th of january

01:55:20 the 7th of january yes so

01:55:23 yes so why did you think that she wanted you to make

01:55:27 make contact with those people when you've already done so well maybe she didn't know i had already contacted these people

01:55:34 people did you get the impression that they were stonewalling you perhaps and i put i i put that to you in a

01:55:42 a a in a leading way but let me ask it slightly differently perhaps did you have any suspicions about why iconic weren't simply giving you the information rather than giving you the information

01:55:54 rather than giving you the information that you already knew

01:55:58 yeah i didn't have an answer as to why they were not answering to to our emails uh as i said earlier it wasn't completely uncommon that

01:56:09 it wasn't completely uncommon that certified holder wouldn't be very responsive during a review because they they thought once the the assessment was done and the certificate was issued then the review was secondary or the

01:56:21 then the review was secondary or the secondary importance did it strike you at the time that this wasn't just a lack of interest or engagement this was that this was now uh

01:56:33 um giving you uh positively answers that you were not asking for or information that you weren't after as opposed to information that you were after and had been after for a very

01:56:45 were after and had been after for a very long time

01:56:46 long time yeah now we know lily across chuck did send a follow-up uh it's it's at the bottom of page one in his email run 13th of january 2015.

01:56:58 13th of january 2015. and she said uh good morning valentina there are two mistakes in my previous email i've wrongly written claude's name it's called verlay and his position is reynabond technical service manager client regards lilia

01:57:12 what did you think when you got that email

01:57:16 i thought it wasn't really helpful

01:57:21 at this point there's still a week to go before your revised deadline of the 20th of 20th of january

01:57:28 january at this point did you think about taking the problem to your team manager so that arconic could be dealt with at a more senior level i did consider it however i had to wait

01:57:41 i did consider it however i had to wait for the agreed deadline before taking any action i see now we can see your next communication at the

01:57:52 can see your next communication at the top of this document

01:57:56 top email on page one it's your email to lydia kostchuk copied to claude velle and celine ernie uh

01:58:03 uh on the 22nd of january 2015. hi lydia sorry for the late reply unfortunately in the last year we've experienced several problems in getting in touch with you and receive the required info to progress our job this leading to severe

01:58:15 progress our job this leading to severe delays in closing this review job for this reason vba has decided to go ahead with the information already in hand i drafted a copy of the review report and i'm waiting for approval from my

01:58:27 and i'm waiting for approval from my team manager after that you will receive it for your personal record now buy information already in hands what did you mean uh information that were publicly

01:58:39 uh information that were publicly available

01:58:44 so sorry that means that referring to the list of information that were requested

01:58:49 requested we were waiving on the request for contact details for the surveys the user survey information

01:59:00 surveys the user survey information regarding the production were supposed to be covered under the uh review

01:59:08 review um surveillance that we did and for what is concerning uh review of the literature instead of waiting for them to send them to us we reviewed wars on their

01:59:19 to us we reviewed wars on their website

01:59:23 we'd seen and i've shown you this a number of times paragraph two both of maria barbato's earlier requests and your

01:59:31 and your word for word uh

01:59:34 repeat of that request in december and again in

01:59:38 again in uh january written confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification context of use or other details that would invalidate the certificate

01:59:49 certificate and a request for any uh any changes that do you agree that by going with the information in already in hand you were going without

02:00:00 already in hand you were going without that information yes that information was something that you couldn't get from a public source is it no the only

02:00:12 is it no the only reliable source was the existence and validity of the csdb certificate

02:00:20 the cstb certificate on your own technical file the one that was publicly available at the time

02:00:29 the time on the cstb's website

02:00:33 yes was it not risky well did you see it as risky at the time to proceed with your review without all

02:00:44 to proceed with your review without all the data

02:00:45 the data that the bba had been seeking repeatedly uh at least since early december by you of the previous year and which have been sought by your predecessor

02:00:57 have been sought by your predecessor miss barbatos since october 2013 16 months previously yes was that a risk that you discussed with anybody else

02:01:08 that you discussed with anybody else within the bba well i did raise uh the matter in its totality

02:01:19 in its totality with my managers and we proceeded according to what was the bba procedure at the time so let's just examine that a little bit more closely

02:01:32 more closely and when you said in your email that you were you had the bba has decided to go ahead with the information already in hands when was that decision made

02:01:44 before sending that email how was it made

02:01:49 made it was discussed uh the situation was discussed with my manager and we agreed that uh there was a short form

02:01:58 form in the fact that we didn't have records from cstb

02:02:01 from cstb but uh managed to do a surveillance for the review and having put in place a quality plan we had some confidence that we had the control

02:02:13 we had the control on the manufacturing and from that point onwards we could check whether there was any change or not who did you have that discussion with

02:02:23 with it was with my manager who was that brian cuomo franco anybody else i believe the the head of accrual was

02:02:34 i believe the the head of accrual was involved at the time we decided this but i can't remember if there was any formal uh communication about that

02:02:44 that would have been brian chamberlain at the time yes yes you say you can't remember whether there was any formal communication about that was there any do you remember being involved speaking to him or him being involved in this

02:02:55 to him or him being involved in this decision

02:02:57 decision informally i don't remember right and can you tell us what the basis the the rationale for proceeding

02:03:09 basis the the rationale for proceeding with the review without that information was

02:03:14 was the rationale was that we had the key concern was around the manufacturing and we had managed to bring that

02:03:25 we had managed to bring that under control there wasn't a reason to believe

02:03:29 believe there had been any changes because we would have been notified by the cstb if there had been any changes

02:03:42 any changes you say you would have been notified by the cstb if there had been any changes let me just understand that were you expecting the cstb to send you underlying test data

02:03:54 underlying test data unilaterally themselves we would have expected because the certificate as to well no was issued as a

02:04:02 a confirmation certificate overseas cstb certificate initially we were expected that csdb would have notified us uh of any changes to the certificate

02:04:15 uh of any changes to the certificate the its use or validity or anything that had to do

02:04:19 had to do with the manufacturing uh if that happened

02:04:24 happened and with that the the agreement was that they would have sent us copies of their in surveillance reports in the factory which in essence we never received um you say

02:04:36 in essence we never received um you say we expected that the cstb would have notified us of any changes to the certificate use or validity et cetera um what was the

02:04:45 the basis on which you understood that cstb would do that there was a mutual agreement within within uh notified bodies across europe

02:04:56 within uh notified bodies across europe whereby a confirmation certificate could be issued on the basis of one certificate issued by another body as long as there was this mutual agreement by which

02:05:07 agreement by which the uh the notified body that was issuing the certificate would have notified the other body in this case bba of any changes to the certificate now

02:05:19 of any changes to the certificate now given that seven years had elapsed between the 14th of january 2008 when the certificate was issued

02:05:27 issued and the 22nd of january 2015 when you decided to go ahead with the information already in hands

02:05:36 why did if this arrangement existed as you say why did you not think of contacting the cstb themselves and just seeking confirmation

02:05:47 seeking confirmation of the up-to-date position in relation to any test data for the rainer bond 55 panels um at the time we

02:06:00 um at the time we we had not received any report as i said and from the experience that i had on other projects and from the experience of some of my other

02:06:11 the experience of some of my other colleagues it was very difficult to reach out to cstb and receive a response but that at that point we decided to just set up our own surveillances

02:06:22 just set up our own surveillances without relying anymore on those sent by cstb because clearly it wasn't working

02:06:31 working given that you had had despite numerous requests for detailed data absolute silence from our conic why did you not think it necessary or

02:06:42 why did you not think it necessary or appropriate to contact the cstb and at least try to get the data from them

02:06:51 it wasn't something that i was advised to do

02:06:54 to do right now going back to an earlier answer okay can i just um ask a question of miss summarizing samurais

02:07:04 samurais one possible course of action which at least occurs to me is that you could have written to arconic

02:07:15 you could have written to arconic saying that unless we get the information we've asked for we shall not be re issuing a review certificate did anyone discuss that do you know at the time the on the occasions where

02:07:27 at the time the on the occasions where these would happen uh where in the cases where the certificate holder would deny access to the factory in effect uh making it impossible to access the

02:07:40 making it impossible to access the factory and do surveillance visit but because in this specific case we were not set up to do surveillances we didn't have any uh reason to believe

02:07:51 we didn't have any uh reason to believe that they wouldn't allow us to the factory therefore that one reason that would have led us to

02:07:58 to suspend the certificate was not in place the day

02:08:02 the day you were asking them for certain information which they had not provided why could you not

02:08:10 you not was there any discussion about whether you should suspend the certificate until unless and until they provided that information i don't remember if there was any

02:08:21 i don't remember if there was any specific discussion on this point but as i said the the common practice was that

02:08:26 was that suspension would only happen where there was an active uh denial from the certificate holder to allow for factory visits

02:08:37 to allow for factory visits do you know why that was uh the procedure you mean why the procedure was like that

02:08:44 like that yes i don't know why it was like that all right thank you very much yes mr miller

02:08:51 miller yes um

02:08:56 was there a process in place at the bba which allowed the bba to proceed with the review with the information in

02:09:08 with the review with the information in hand

02:09:09 hand despite uh despite there being no response to specific requests for data from the clients

02:09:20 yes as i said as long as you could review at least the information publicly available

02:09:29 available which are technical data sheets marketing uh brochures installation brochures which are effectively what um buyer would read and as long as you could

02:09:42 would read and as long as you could uh justify the the the product hadn't changed in performance by doing surveillances then that would be enough

02:09:51 be enough to proceed with the with the review i see so does that come does it come to this

02:10:00 this that the certificate the review of the certificate would only be as good as the claims made in the

02:10:11 be as good as the claims made in the technical data sheets marketing brochures and installation brochures that the buyer would read as i said the key was reviewing the

02:10:22 as i said the key was reviewing the factory data so this the quality plan was written in a way

02:10:28 a way that you would have full control on the incoming products on the in-house testing and testing before before releasing the product the

02:10:39 before releasing the product the labeling

02:10:40 labeling all the quality procedures in the factory so if that was in place and it was correctly executed then that would give bba the confidence that the

02:10:51 confidence that the manufacturing uh was under control and therefore

02:10:55 therefore there wouldn't be any change in the formulation that would trigger changes in the performance

02:11:03 but i think as you confirmed before the surveillance at a resulting quality plan against which surveillance would take place wouldn't tell you anything about

02:11:15 fire safety and wouldn't reveal any data about fire safety would it no the underlying assumption is that if um

02:11:26 the underlying assumption is that if um that that is generally if uh a product has been assessed and it has been assessed with a certain formulation that can achieve a certain fire

02:11:37 that can achieve a certain fire performance if that formulation doesn't change then there is no reason to believe

02:11:41 believe that the fire performance changes fire or any other performance well let me put to you that one reason to suspect that it might have done or

02:11:52 to suspect that it might have done or that your client might have new information is when they don't respond

02:11:56 respond to a request for it

02:12:01 do you agree yes uh can we look at your witness statement at page 12 paragraph 63.

02:12:19 letter g on that page just above paragraph 63 you could see the question that was asked a decision was made to close

02:12:29 close review a153729 and proceed with the information already in hand because of problems contacting the certificate holder

02:12:36 holder who made that decision i cannot recall exactly but it would have normally been a collective decision of the pm the tm and the hoa i think we've covered this but the hoa just to be clear was

02:12:47 this but the hoa just to be clear was brian chamberlain was it yes he's the head of approvals was john albon involved in this decision at the time can you recall no because it was head of approval of

02:12:58 no because it was head of approval of the other department i see now perennicomo i think we we know became team leader on the 5th of january 2015 uh and you've told us that he was

02:13:10 uh and you've told us that he was involved in that in this decision did he make this decision or give impart this decision to you in the capacity of team leader

02:13:20 i don't remember if it was just him or it was a call as i said a collective decision uh with involving also the head of approval

02:13:31 of approval do i take it that because we haven't seen any emails in relation to this decision it was done it was made orally during the course of conversations between you and mr nokomo and possibly mr chamberlain yes yes

02:13:51 if we go back to your statement uh the question you're asked next is why did you say the review had been going on for almost one and a half year we reviewed we had reviewed the content

02:14:02 we reviewed we had reviewed the content of the certificate and the technical documentation publicly available for the product

02:14:06 product we've finally managed to put in place a qp carry out one factory visit and set up surveillances for the future this was deemed sufficient at the time to close the review was the fact that the request for

02:14:18 was the fact that the request for information had been going on for a long time relevant to the decision that was

02:14:28 was it not the case that if the client was being unresponsive over such a long time was that not a warning that you shouldn't go further without full information

02:14:38 perhaps can we then go back to your statement uh at page 12 and look at inquiry question three

02:14:48 three little roman three towards the bottom of the screen is it the usual course of the vba to continue to certify a product in the absence of a full response from the certificate holder at review

02:14:58 review if not why was it done on this occasion and your response we can see together is a paragraph 65 and you say very often the certificate holder would reply supplying information publicly available

02:15:09 supplying information publicly available so the intervention of the certificate holder in the review has somehow in my opinion become redundant especially since user surveys and complaints history reviews are no longer carried out the complaints review is however still

02:15:21 the complaints review is however still part of the surveillance visit when the response of the certificate holder is absolutely necessary that the matter is escalated and the tm or the

02:15:29 the hoa we go over the page

02:15:35 if you go over the page please uh thank you hoa intervene if no answer is received the hoa could take action and decide to suspend and then withdraw the certificate

02:15:46 the certificate and why was it not absolutely necessary for arconic to respond in this case given the nature of the material which the bba had sought and which had been outstanding for so long by this

02:15:57 been outstanding for so long by this point

02:15:59 and the key reason i believe was because we

02:16:04 we did get a response uh regarding the de facto visits which was our key concern

02:16:11 concern but there wasn't any indication that there was a bad faith from the client side to hide things from uva

02:16:21 again i repeat the question you say there wasn't any indication that there was bad faith from the client side to hide things from the vba did it not occur to you at the time that in fact arconic by not answering

02:16:32 in fact arconic by not answering request item 2 and other requests for so long despite repeated requests we're up to something as i said it wasn't unusual that certified holder would just ignore

02:16:45 that certified holder would just ignore the emails that we sent during the reviews considering that they're not not important for them and would you normally proceed to close a review despite repeated requests for

02:16:56 a review despite repeated requests for information it depends depending whether you had other um worrying issues that you had to deal

02:17:08 worrying issues that you had to deal with

02:17:10 with for example if in this case if we were not able to to do any factory visit if we're not able to put in place a quality plan that could have probably been one case we would have suspended the certificate

02:17:22 would have suspended the certificate did it not worry you that you had not had an answer to the question or set of alternative questions

02:17:29 questions and requests for confirmation contained in paragraph 2 of your own emails yes and if that was worrying

02:17:40 yes and if that was worrying why did this case not form an exception

02:17:45 so that you didn't close the review without those answers as i said the final decision wasn't down to me

02:17:58 now can we go to bba four zero eight zero seven three

02:18:06 this is an email uh the 10th of april 2015

02:18:10 2015 from pranakomo to you relating to the review

02:18:13 review and he says valentino please find above the above please find attached the above review report with my comments i've tracked the changes so you can just accept if you agree and the report will be as good as finished i had a few

02:18:24 be as good as finished i had a few questions on the surveillance visit table as shown i'll have all your six reports commented on by monday so we have them closed by next friday at the latest i hate losing and the other teams are creeping up the

02:18:35 and the other teams are creeping up the closed reviews leader borders can be seen on the board behind rakesh once you have the report ready bring me hard copies of both the report and request

02:18:43 request log for sign off thanks kind regards prayer

02:18:46 prayer homo was there a physical leaderboard hanging in the office showing closed reviews

02:18:54 reviews no it was just a running joke

02:18:58 who's rakesh uh he was the former employee at bba also a team manager right you say it was a joke

02:19:10 right you say it was a joke this looks pretty specific uh as can be seen on the board behind rakesh if it's a joke can you bring me in on it i don't remember

02:19:21 bring me in on it i don't remember specifically seeing any board with numbers on it was there actually a board there was a board

02:19:29 board for general communication i just don't remember if there were numbers on closed reviews

02:19:34 reviews on it where was this board kept it was hank on the wall in the office yeah right so there was a board on the office

02:19:45 office in the office with a public display of who'd closed what reviews is that right no i said that that was meant to be for public competitions and i don't recall

02:19:57 public competitions and i don't recall seeing the numbers of reviews on that board

02:20:01 board what was on the board i don't remember it was general communications it was an internal rivalry as to which team could close the most reviews

02:20:14 team could close the most reviews i don't remember that well you were your were you or your colleagues within the bba incentivized to close reviews as fast as possible

02:20:25 the incentive was to close them we did within the six months allocated time

02:20:36 yes but was there a rivalry was there a was there a race between you and your colleagues as to the speed with which you could

02:20:47 as to the speed with which you could close a review i don't remember i've been taking part to any race or speed race what was

02:20:57 the competition to which this email alludes on its face at least a factor in the decision to close this review on the iconic certificate

02:21:09 the iconic certificate there was there was a drive to close as many projects as possible before the financial year that's that's for sure but uh i don't remember being

02:21:20 remember being there being any uh competition between employees or at least i wasn't part of it when was the end of the financial year march right

02:21:33 so this one missed it simply yes can we then go to your witness statement at page seven paragraph 37 please

02:21:47 and uh let's look together at inquiry question e on that page prior to the fire at grenfell tower did the project manager or any other person at the bba ask for any and all fire performance information including

02:21:59 information including one reports and or data refer performance tests to bs 476 part 6 bs 476 part 7 at eu five performance tests

02:22:08 tests nfeu 13823 and nf iso 11925 part two and you have an answer at paragraph 37 either set of tests were deemed acceptable in line with the adb that's

02:22:20 acceptable in line with the adb that's current at the time however new fire test reports were not requested as part of each review unless there had been a change in the formulation that would trigger the request

02:22:27 request it must be noted that the qp of reviews places an onus on the certificate holder the bba are advised of any changes that could affect performance of the product now just on examining what you say there

02:22:40 now just on examining what you say there a little bit more closely if we can is it right that if the client had done a fresh test and obtained a fresh classification which downgraded the classification

02:22:53 which downgraded the classification that had been stated in the bba report when first issued are you are you saying here that it was bba policy not expressly to ask for that new data

02:23:05 not expressly to ask for that new data unless the product had changed physically

02:23:10 what i'm saying here is that unless we would be supplied with that with that test data we would not know that that test data existed and of course if we were supplied with

02:23:21 and of course if we were supplied with that test data we would assess it

02:23:30 accordingly

02:23:34 is it right that you uh would not routinely ask for new fire test reports even though

02:23:45 new fire test reports even though if they existed it might show that the certificate had become wrong in some way as i mentioned earlier the request for new fire test

02:23:56 new fire test reports was not part of the review so we wouldn't

02:24:00 wouldn't specifically ask if there was if there were new test data however if the client was to submit new test data because they had not done tests and they

02:24:11 because they had not done tests and they wanted those tests to be reflected in the certificate then we would assess them but unless they were to told to tell us that those tests existed there was no way for us to know it so i see so basically what you're

02:24:24 it so i see so basically what you're saying here is that the the onus lay on the client in all cases to provide you with new fire test data or reports yeah

02:24:35 at the time did you have any thoughts about whether the client understood that well enough time being iconic in this particular case that they had anonymous to provide

02:24:46 case that they had anonymous to provide new test data i think that was made clear when they signed the original contract

02:24:59 uh yes and the original contract it goes back to 2007 as we know in this case

02:25:08 case given that some seven or eight years had elapsed between the original contract and this review although they've been an intervening review in 2011.

02:25:20 review in 2011. did it occur to you to spell out to the client

02:25:24 client that the owners lay on them specifically to give you any new test data or classification reports no i did not spell it out to them

02:25:37 no i did not spell it out to them did you think you should have done or rather did at the time did it occur to you to do so no at the time i didn't think i would have needed to do that because it's not

02:25:50 to do that because it's not it's not my job to make them aware of what they're um honestly

02:25:58 did you have any thoughts at the time about whether new fire test data or new classification reports fell within the scope of paragraph two

02:26:09 within the scope of paragraph two of your request for data that you've sent in uh december and again in january and that ms barbato had sent in the october of 2013 and the july of 2014.

02:26:23 october of 2013 and the july of 2014. that could have formed part of the of the imprint wide but not necessarily

02:26:31 you say it could have but not necessarily do i take it from that that any new fire test data or classification reports

02:26:38 reports were actually being asked for within paragraph two or at least a confirmation that there weren't any that were relevant yes that is part of the request uh

02:26:49 yes that is part of the request uh to confirm that there has been no changes

02:26:53 changes and therefore receiving no answer to that

02:26:56 that uh would be i would suggest you extremely unsatisfactory because you wouldn't know one way or the other whether there were or not any such new test reports

02:27:09 yes and therefore i i come back to my question why did you not press are conic before closing this review for a confirmation at the very least

02:27:21 for a confirmation at the very least that there was no new fire test data or classification reports it wasn't a specific request uh formally in that letter to provide

02:27:33 in that letter to provide um test data the the the request was to confirm or not whether there had been any changes to the formulation is there any sorry go ahead between which we did not receive

02:27:45 which we did not receive clearly and um yeah it wasn't the policy at the time to enforce it

02:27:54 it wasn't the policy at the time to enforce it are you saying that it wasn't the policy at the time to enforce the contractual obligation to provide new test data that arconic had undertaken in its original contract with the bba back in

02:28:06 original contract with the bba back in 2007.

02:28:08 2007. so it wasn't a contractual obligation for them to provide new test data as such but to provide information whether it has been or not been a changes in the formulation

02:28:19 changes in the formulation at the time when i when i started to work at vba there wasn't a specific procedure that would tell you to

02:28:26 to stop the review or to draw a certificate if you

02:28:29 if you did not receive that specific confirmation i'm sorry to to interrupt this play but i've just noticed that at line one in the transcript

02:28:40 the transcript uh the transcriber has respond has transcribed your answer it wasn't a contractual obligation i heard you saying that there was a contractual obligation could you clarify i said there wasn't a

02:28:52 could you clarify i said there wasn't a contractual obligation for them to supply

02:28:54 supply new test data but to there was a contractual obligation to provide provide confirmation that there had been any change okay so it's slightly different they had

02:29:05 okay so it's slightly different they had to confirm that they there wasn't any change but they they didn't have an obligation to provide test data straight away right um did you rev yourself ever

02:29:17 right um did you rev yourself ever actually

02:29:18 actually review the contract with vba that iconic had no not the original contract no there wasn't anybody did anybody give you any instruction at least an outline about

02:29:29 instruction at least an outline about what our colleagues basic obligations were under that contract yes what did they tell you about new test data

02:29:37 test data they said that they had to inform us if there had been any changes in the manufacturing process or in the formulation if there had been changes to that

02:29:48 if there had been changes to that manufacturing process or formulation then we we could raise a technical ratio which would request new test data depending on what the change

02:29:58 change was but nobody ever told you that there was an obligation to provide new test data no not straight away right i see did you ever

02:30:09 right i see did you ever this time january 2015 to april 2015 think to go back and look at the contract to see what it was you could force sarconic to do by way of

02:30:20 you could force sarconic to do by way of answering your question or questions occurred to me i had only been at bba for three months at the time so i wasn't really

02:30:29 really aware of all these procedures i understand that but my question was whether it occurred to you um to look at the contract to see what it was

02:30:39 it was that iconic was contractually obliged to give you no i did not look at the contract

02:30:44 contract did it occur to you to investigate perhaps with your seniors how you could enforce uh the request for data that you'd you'd put in your emails to iconic

02:30:57 put in your emails to iconic no i did make them aware that there were these issues and i was advised to proceed as i did

02:31:08 can we go back to your statement to page

02:31:12 13.

02:31:16 uh please and and uh we'll look at the question

02:31:19 question asked at item roman four on that page

02:31:26 uh at the top of the screen did you use straight the bba consider suspending or withdrawing certificate zero eight four five one zero if so why was actually not taken answer there was no reason to believe such an action would be required at the

02:31:38 such an action would be required at the time

02:31:39 time now you've already answered some questions from the chairman on this but i have a further question why was not receiving any data at all in response to a series of repeated requests

02:31:51 requests to the client over 16 months not itself reason enough to believe that suspension or withdrawal was justified

02:32:02 as i said the procedure at the time was that there was not a reason to suspend the certificate

02:32:14 can we go to a fire test report that was on the original technical file and it's test 5a and you'll find this at arc50358

02:32:37 and you'll find this at arc50358 um this is as you can see the first page of a cstb

02:32:42 of a cstb uh fire reaction to fire classification report

02:32:45 report under um en 13501 part one and you can see the date of issue bottom of the screen is the 7th of january 2005 and it relates as you can see in the

02:32:56 and it relates as you can see in the middle of the screen to commercial brand rayna bond 55 pe riveted system and above that you can see the name alcoa

02:33:07 above that you can see the name alcoa and above that do you see it says valid five years as from january 7th 2005. yes um and uh now this was on the technical file

02:33:18 technical file when you reviewed the technical file for the purposes of doing your review of the certificate did you see this document i did not review the original assessment as part of the review i was only reviewing the technical

02:33:30 i was only reviewing the technical information that were available publicly available uh

02:33:35 uh on on the website so what was on our website

02:33:38 website did you not look into the technical file and look at this document i did not look at the technical dossier from the original assessment that was not part of the scope of the review

02:33:50 right so you saying that in any review you do have a certificate you don't go back and look at the original technical file

02:33:58 file you don't unless there is a reason to do that

02:34:01 that like a change in formulation that would trigger a reassessment i see in in general terms and you can see that the expiry date would be january 2010

02:34:14 the expiry date would be january 2010 but in general terms did you know that uh um fire classifications under em13501 are valid for a maximum of five years

02:34:25 years i did not know at the time right when did you learn that do you think later on much later on much later on while he was still at the bba or after you've left the bbq

02:34:38 bba or after you've left the bbq right but that time limitation was not applied on ultrasonal test reports right

02:34:53 did it occur to you given that um

02:35:02 seven years had elapsed between the issue of the certificate in january 2008 and your review in the january of 2015 that the age of the certificate um

02:35:14 that the age of the certificate um that since the certificate was issued our colleague must have done further testing or else be relying on a very out of date classification it did not occur to me at the time

02:35:26 it did not occur to me at the time because i i did not see this report

02:35:35 now can i just show you something that mr albon says in his second statement this is at bba three zeros one zero seven two three

02:35:54 one zero seven two three i'd like to go to page 34 please

02:35:59 and look on page 34 at paragraph 139

02:36:05 and the question is posed at paragraph 30 or question 31 at the top of the screen

02:36:11 screen uh in circumstances where no response was received to the lessons referred to at paragraphs 48 49

02:36:18 48 49 15 51 that's in his statement what action did the bba take in response why did the bba not take steps to follow up on these requests and or to withdraw the certificate what was this in accordance with

02:36:29 what was this in accordance with relevant procedures in what circumstances would the bba withdraw a certificate and a paragraph 139 mr albon says bba procedures do allow sanctions to be

02:36:40 bba procedures do allow sanctions to be taken

02:36:42 taken for example where there is a lack of cooperation by certificate holders and this could lead to suspension or withdrawal of a certificate it goes on to say however on my review of the documents in this case i could

02:36:54 of the documents in this case i could see no reason to believe that there was any additional information conflicting with that given in the certificate in addition the certificate holder was continuing to cooperate in other ways such as maintaining the

02:37:05 ways such as maintaining the surveillance operated over the manufacturing process it seems to have been considered at the time that withdrawing the certificate would be a disproportionate response to the lack of communication from the certificate holder during the review

02:37:17 certificate holder during the review process

02:37:18 process my question is did you yourself know at the time

02:37:22 the time that vba procedures did allow suspension or withdrawal of a certificate in response to a lack of cooperation by a certificate holder yes and that is

02:37:34 by a certificate holder yes and that is what i was referring to earlier saying that suspension would be considered if uh the certificate holder would not allow you to visit the factory that was

02:37:45 allow you to visit the factory that was the key

02:37:45 the key reason why you would suspend the certificate i want to look at some of the testing that arconic was doing at this time and i'm going to give you a short

02:37:56 and i'm going to give you a short timeline

02:37:57 timeline by may about our conics testing and then ask you some questions about it so a little bit like before i showed you a run of documents and then came to a question i'm going to do the same again say bear with me um we start with the 2011 review which

02:38:10 um we start with the 2011 review which closed in june 2011. now in in february 2011 arconic had done further european tests of reyno bond pe in rivet form

02:38:21 in rivet form and had achieved a bs 1d naught that's february 11 and then october 11 arconic did another european test of raynaud pe in cassette form and this time the cstb

02:38:35 in cassette form and this time the cstb issued a classification report saying the cassette form was class e

02:38:40 that october 11 cassette class e there were more tests done at the end of 2013

02:38:47 2013 and on jan on the 31st of january 2014 the cstb issued a classification report that renault bond in either form cassette or rivet was class e uh that's january 14 that's

02:39:01 was class e uh that's january 14 that's at a time when maria barbato was asking for information from arconic and that e-classification for rivet and and cassette equally for reynabond 55

02:39:12 equally for reynabond 55 pe lasted for the whole of the rest of 2014 until the 4th of december 2014 two days after you started your review

02:39:21 review and on that date 4th of december 2014 at arconic's request the cstb issued a new classification reports set a set of reports rivet

02:39:32 reports set a set of reports rivet goes down from b to c becomes c s 2 d naught and cassette still classified at e

02:39:42 now there were also numerous changes to the recipe for the fr core of of rainer bond and tests on those calls now in the light of that rather long

02:39:53 in the light of that rather long little speech i've given about the chronology of testing at the time

02:39:59 is it safe to say that when this review closed in april 2015 you yourself had no idea about any of that

02:40:07 that that's correct are you able to explain why neither you nor anybody else so far as we can see at the bba had any idea of that

02:40:20 any idea of that because as i mentioned uh requesting new test data

02:40:25 test data was not part of the formal requests for a review so we did not ask formally the client to supply the test data and likewise the client did not

02:40:36 likewise the client did not willingly supply those test data to us so there was no way for us to know that there were any new test data effectively uh did you expect

02:40:49 uh did you expect that arconic would tell you of these new tests the new test data and the new classification reports that i've just referred to yes and did you expect

02:41:00 yes and did you expect that by asking for confirmation that there were no changes iconic would come back with changes such as these

02:41:10 as these uh that had happened i would have expected iconic to come back to us and say that there had been a change in the formulation if that was the case and we would have

02:41:22 if that was the case and we would have requested

02:41:23 requested testing data to to prove uh the performance of this new formulation

02:41:36 leaving aside formulation doesn't the approach that you've been describing during the second part of this morning that our bba was taking doesn't that approach mean that

02:41:49 doesn't that approach mean that arconic was essentially free to keep for itself

02:41:52 itself all these new tests and and reclassifications of the product covered by the certificate and not tell you about it i believe that is what happened

02:42:04 i believe that is what happened it's what happened but i'm suggesting to you that the reason it happened was because you didn't follow up and press for the for the information that you've been asking for repeatedly for months

02:42:15 for months contained specifically in paragraph two of your own emails as i mentioned uh that sentence was referred primarily to the changes

02:42:26 changes in the manufacturing process not specifically to test data test data would be a consequence of those changes and it would be something that we would ask in response to those

02:42:37 that we would ask in response to those changes

02:42:38 changes why would test data be a consequence of those changes as opposed simply to a desire by the manufacturer to re-test

02:42:49 desire by the manufacturer to re-test without any such changes if they decided to retest

02:42:54 to retest they had the freedom to share those uh tests with us but it wouldn't be a request for us for them to retest if there wasn't any necessity

02:43:05 necessity no indeed but what i'm really putting to you

02:43:08 you is uh that uh where a client decides to subject its existing product covered by a certificate to a new fire classification uh nuke fire classification test or new

02:43:20 uh nuke fire classification test or new set of fire tests and a further classification you weren't going to pick that up unless you specifically demanded of it demanded it as a condition of the review

02:43:32 demanded it as a condition of the review yes

02:43:37 do you accept that that is a major gap in the information being saw by the bba

02:43:48 yes and the proceeding with the information in hand

02:43:53 in hand as opposed to proceeding only once you've had a clear answer to the question contained at paragraph two of your email

02:44:06 meant that this test data would not form part of your review even if they had replied to that request they they could have uh

02:44:20 request they they could have uh not sent the report the the answer to that question was have you changed or not something in your manufacturing process that um

02:44:32 that um would treat the reassessment of your product essentially

02:44:37 so the answer to that question was yes or no we've changed something and we would have as a consequence asked for new test data

02:44:48 well let's go back to your own email just to see if we go to your second of december email bba four zeros

02:45:00 second of december email bba four zeros eight

02:45:01 eight zero nine eight

02:45:05 looked at it earlier miss amareso i think we may need to look at it again uh this is your email of the second of december

02:45:14 december following your conversation with mr nicoma earlier that day and look at paragraph two to claude verlay you're asking for written confirmation that there have been no changes in the design specification

02:45:25 design specification context of use or other details other details that would invalidate the certificate alternatively please specify any changes

02:45:36 alternatively please specify any changes why wouldn't the fact that reyno bond pe in cassette form had received an e or the fact that in rivet form it was now a c

02:45:46 c as opposed to a b which was stated in the certificate not be an other detail that would invalidate the certificate

02:45:59 something that had been done to change that

02:46:02 that performance so we would have sold in the first place to understand what caused that change but with respect this request is much

02:46:14 but with respect this request is much wider than that is it not you're asking for confirmation in writing

02:46:20 writing that there have been no changes in as you can see design specification context of use or other details why isn't uh a reclassification

02:46:31 why isn't uh a reclassification down from b to c in respect of ribbit a change

02:46:34 change in the details that would invalidate the certificate in that respect yes we would have expected that if there was

02:46:43 was a new test data from the client they would have supplied that to us regardless i'm putting to you of whether they've been a change in the manufacturing process or the the ingredients of the product

02:46:57 the ingredients of the product no it's it's it is not regardless it's it's connected to that

02:47:03 it may be it may not be connected to that but the question doesn't connect it to that does it the question is much broader than that yes we're asking to confirm there has

02:47:14 yes we're asking to confirm there has been no change to the problem

02:47:19 and at the time did you understand it to be as broad as that

02:47:24 yes

02:47:33 now

02:47:41 can we agree that those new classifications that i've just taken you through in 2011 2013

02:47:52 in 2011 2013 2014

02:47:55 2014 meant that the certificate

02:48:00 was or it had become materially wrong

02:48:07 yes if the the product that was tested was exactly the same that was certified yes and let me be very clear with you about what i mean by materially wrong

02:48:18 about what i mean by materially wrong do you agree that the first respect in which it was materially wrong was that it said that the pe called rayno bond standard was euro class b when in fact

02:48:32 standard was euro class b when in fact by the time this review was closed it was euro class c yes yes based on the test data that you referred

02:48:41 referred to yes and the second respect in which it was materially wrong um is that it omitted any statement that pe cassette was class e

02:48:56 yes now on those classifications do you accept that renabon pe did not meet the european standard set out and required by diagram 40 of

02:49:08 set out and required by diagram 40 of approved document b

02:49:11 yes basically that's the data that you mentioned yes and can we agree that that is a critically important piece of information of course yeah yes had you had that

02:49:22 of course yeah yes had you had that information can we agree that you would have put it in a certificate of course yes

02:49:28 yes how do you think you would have recorded it

02:49:31 it in the certificate as a result of your review how do you know that information well the first step i would have carried out a reassessment

02:49:42 out a reassessment of the certificate to try to understand what had triggered that change in performance and then after satisfactory assessment i would have updated the certificate to reflect

02:49:54 have updated the certificate to reflect these changes which means uh i would have put as we did afterwards a high limitation on the use of that

02:50:05 a high limitation on the use of that product

02:50:06 product would you have asked that or ask your seniors perhaps that the certificate should be suspended until those changes were made

02:50:18 that was not the procedure at the time so

02:50:22 so this festivity would be still valid while the changes were being made would you have put an update on the bba website about the changes that you were proposing to make

02:50:34 proposing to make are you asking what i would have done if i was empowered to to do something or what was happening at the time

02:50:41 the time let me try a different way would the bba have put an update on its website if it had learned of these changes at the time there wasn't such a procedure

02:50:52 wasn't such a procedure right would the bba have uh required the client iconic in this case to inform all

02:51:03 client iconic in this case to inform all of its customers to whom the certificate had been given in its originally issued form that it was now materially wrong and was about to be updated that was not something that was in the

02:51:15 that was not something that was in the power of vba to do how could the bba allow a certificate that was materially wrong to remain in circulation pending amendment

02:51:28 pending amendment that is not a question you should ask me probably

02:51:32 probably i think your answer is i don't know then is that right

02:51:36 okay um

02:51:50 can you explain why when you signed off this review you didn't uh or those seniors perhaps didn't qualify the certificate

02:52:01 qualify the certificate to say that it was based on publicly available data that may or may not be up to date

02:52:09 um do you mean that we should have made that clear on the certificate

02:52:16 uh well i'm just asking you why the certificate carries no qualification within it that the claims made for compliance

02:52:29 the claims made for compliance particularly with the building regulations in relation to behavior in fire was based on publicly available data that may or may not be up to date

02:52:41 that may or may not be up to date that was not common practice at the time that wasn't perfect

02:52:51 when a reader of the reviewed certificate looks at it did

02:53:00 they would be entitled to think wouldn't they that the bba had satisfied itself that the claims being made as to the fire performance of the product were true

02:53:10 true do you do you agree with that with that yes

02:53:15 yes and but would it follow that if you were if the bba was simply basing itself on publicly available data um then that might not be true

02:53:26 yes so the question is why did the certificate say on its face that it it was based only on publicly

02:53:37 that it it was based only on publicly available data and that no assessment had been made of any up-to-date test data or classification

02:53:51 it wasn't a procedure at the time to put such a statement in the fifty figures

02:53:58 can we go to page four of your statement

02:54:04 please

02:54:13 we can see uh there there is a question at the top of the page under little c what documents and or assurances would be requested from the certificate holder and how would these be assessed and

02:54:26 and how would these be assessed and underneath that we can see a paragraph 22 we need to scroll down lower down the screen we can see

02:54:39 that you say this copies of current uk technical literature and installation instructions relating to the product these would be reviewed against the content of the certificate to ensure the certificate holder would

02:54:50 to ensure the certificate holder would not claim incorrect performance data and would not misuse the bba logo and when you

02:54:55 when you when you say current uk technical literature there do you mean uk national fire classifications and other national standards or do you include european standards too

02:55:08 include european standards too i include any technical literature that is made publicly available from the certificate holder to the uk market

02:55:19 i see so you mean technical literature circulating in the uk as opposed to uh uk test requirements yes i see

02:55:32 that that answers one question on that formulation but looking at the word current copies of current uk technical literature does that mean that if you don't have in

02:55:43 does that mean that if you don't have in hand

02:55:44 hand the current technical literature your check as part of your review would not ensure that the certificate holder would not be claiming incorrect performance

02:55:59 not be claiming incorrect performance that statement you would check what is made publicly available to the uk market at that point in time and if there are false claims on that

02:56:10 and if there are false claims on that literature you would pick that up with the certificate holder to rectify it you wouldn't know if there were false claims in the current uk technical literature unless

02:56:23 current uk technical literature unless you had the up-to-date test data and up-to-date classification reports there would you

02:56:28 would you that would and that would be an assessment done on the basis of what is covered in the certificate so for example

02:56:35 example if iconic was to market uh a system including a subframe for the partner that would be a false claim

02:56:44 claim because that wouldn't be covered in the

02:56:52 certificate

02:56:56 so as i understand the words current uk technical literature i think all you mean by that is the the current and otherwise up-to-date marketing literature that

02:57:07 marketing literature that that iconic put out and technical differences which are also normally publicly available on the yes by your website so you your review

02:57:18 yes by your website so you your review would simply be as i think you made clear before uh checking concept for consistency as between the current uk technical literature and installation instructions

02:57:29 literature and installation instructions publicly available on the one hand between the text of the publicly available certificate on the other yes because a reassessment is not covered in a review scope right

02:57:55 i'm not sure i should apologize for stopping three minutes early but i've come to a natural break the next topic will probably last a bit more than three minutes

02:58:02 minutes well then i think uh we should stop at that point just a minute don't you yes i think i don't think an apology is required

02:58:09 required um right well as you've heard uh mr marozza we're going to stop at this point so we can all get some lunch we'll come back at two o'clock please and please remember what i said to you

02:58:21 and please remember what i said to you earlier uh not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it over the break all right yeah thank you very much

02:58:30 very much see you a bit later

02:58:47 you