Grenfell Tower Inquiry - British Board of Agrément (BBA) Evidence - Wednesday 17th March 2021 (2/2)
00:00:09 good afternoon everyone welcome back uh we're now going to see whether mr millet has any further questions for our witness mr moore so i'll begin by checking
00:00:20 moore so i'll begin by checking that mr moore is there he can see me and hear me ahead hello mr moore hello mr chairman i can see you and hear you clearly good thank you very much well we'll now find out if mr millet has
00:00:32 well we'll now find out if mr millet has some more questions for you mr millet yes mr chairman thank you i do um we were looking at a document before the morning break at bba four zeros nine five nine 9596
00:00:44 at bba four zeros nine five nine 9596 you'll recall that this was an email about the faqs i'll wait for it to come up
00:00:53 i'm going to ask for another document to be put up on the screen at the same time namely ctar 6043
00:01:13 namely ctar 6043 now you will remember this morning mr moore that you and i were examining the letter on the left of the screen the email from richard beale of the 6th of july 2017
00:01:24 of july 2017 to you john alban and simon rowe uh about the employees who had raised some concerns relating to faqs regarding grenfell tower now i'd like just to explore with you a
00:01:36 now i'd like just to explore with you a little bit more what those faqs were because i think you had some
00:01:40 had some concerns that you won't be showing the right ones if you look at the right hand side of the screen you can see that there's a document which starts at the top bba certification
00:01:51 certification and what it means and then if you look down
00:01:55 down you can see halfway down the screen you can find out more about this and the bba from our website and then underneath that it says bba statement related to all inquiries regarding bva certification
00:02:06 regarding bva certification and the fire testing of products uh if we go to page two in that document
00:02:14 you can see at the top of that page it says frequently asked questions relating to grenfell tower the first question what is the status of a bba certificate uh and then halfway down the page
00:02:28 uh and then halfway down the page two-thirds of the way down the screen you can see there's an update fourth of august 2017. c q a 14 for updated position and then there are further q a's below that
00:02:40 there are further q a's below that now my first question is uh is this document on the right of the screen the faqs in respect of which the employee
00:02:51 in respect of which the employee had raised the concerns as recorded in the email on the left of the screen
00:03:03 i i don't know if it is the same but there were faqs on the website and you did point out some other ones i think two local authorities so i'm not sure which of the two
00:03:15 which of the two are are being referred to all right um do you know how long the faqs as it were q a's had been on the bba
00:03:26 as it were q a's had been on the bba website
00:03:26 website before the update on the 4th of august 2017.
00:03:32 2017. no i doubt i'm afraid all right now if we scroll um uh down a little bit further uh
00:03:45 down a little bit further uh uh if uh if if we look at halfway down page two we can see that in the middle of the page there are two paragraphs uh just above update fourth of august do
00:03:58 uh just above update fourth of august do you see
00:04:00 you see yes show you the first of those says the certificate has remained in its current form since issue in 2008 as stated above there have been no significant regulatory changes
00:04:11 significant regulatory changes that would have required a reissue of the certificate
00:04:17 uh and my question there uh is uh well if you look actually on the left hand side of the screen before i get to the question you can see that the concern raised by the
00:04:29 that the concern raised by the employee is in item two uh no significant regulatory change which leads to certificate change false and mr beal has put in
00:04:40 false and mr beal has put in there have been a number of regulatory changes since 2008 which would have led to a change in the certificate certificate being updated and changed for example following a review of report
00:04:51 for example following a review of report s153729 to 2014 in which the bba sent report and contract which highlights regulatory changes
00:04:58 changes the contract was not followed up and that certificate was not updated web statement gives the impression that the certificate is up to date and do you agree that in the paragraph i've shown you
00:05:09 shown you in the faqs so far the web statement does give the impression that the certificate is up to date
00:05:17 date when it wasn't
00:05:23 um i i i don't believe there were significant regulatory changes you i'm sure the inquiry can confirm that but that seems to be the
00:05:34 seems to be the key part of the sentence if it was the case that there had been significant regulatory changes that would have required a reissue of
00:05:46 that would have required a reissue of the certificate then then clearly that statement is is not accurate but i can't agree unless i i'm aware whether there were significant regulary changes regulatory
00:05:58 significant regulary changes regulatory changes that would have required a reissue
00:06:01 reissue can you help me well let me try it this way um
00:06:04 way um you told us uh this morning very helpfully in your evidence that at some point you weren't sure whether it was before or after the fire but
00:06:13 but but but at some point there had um the bba had arrived at a consensus because of the filler debate if i can use a shorthand uh a a panel such as reinaborn pe
00:06:26 uh a a panel such as reinaborn pe 55 had to um comply both with the um requirements under section 12.7
00:06:37 requirements under section 12.7 and the requirements of diagram 40. remember that yes now that may not have been a regulatory change but it was certainly
00:06:46 certainly wasn't it a change in opinion uh on the part of the bba about what the regulations meant and how they should be applied
00:06:58 well i think i think it's a different question whether there had been significant regulatory changes um with respect so i'm not sure that that that statement is
00:07:10 i'm not sure that that that statement is as the whistleblower suggested misleading um that it doesn't strike me that way but but that must be a matter for others to to judge so i don't think
00:07:22 for others to to judge so i don't think that's
00:07:22 that's necessarily incorrect let me just pin you down if i can would you accept that if in fact the bba had come to the the opinion that there was a double requirement
00:07:33 requirement in the in in approved document b for products such as rayner bond 55 namely satisfaction of section 12.7 to show that it was limited combustibility because it had a pe core
00:07:45 combustibility because it had a pe core and also satisfaction of diagram 40 either by achieving class naught or class b
00:07:52 class b or better then that new view is something that is not reflected in the paragraph i've been reading to you on the right of the screen the certificate has remained
00:08:03 the screen the certificate has remained in its current form etc is it i can agree it is not reflected in that paragraph but i don't believe that amounts to it being a significant regulatory change
00:08:15 being a significant regulatory change the capital r of regulatory suggests its status statute uh statutory instrument or
00:08:21 or or a law so i'm not sure i i i could agree with your with your assertion right so literally um i i understand what you're saying but
00:08:33 um i i understand what you're saying but the spirit of what's being uh imparted here wouldn't be accurately represented would it if in fact the bba had decided that the building regulations now required a double requirement
00:08:44 requirement as opposed to the single requirement implied by the certificate
00:08:50 well i think in the nature of faqs that that's
00:08:55 that's um you know that's a distinction that would would take some clarification there
00:09:00 there um on balance i don't think i'm persuaded
00:09:03 persuaded but um if if there had been a change in in regulatory in the law uh significantly in that period and the bba had made this statement then
00:09:14 and the bba had made this statement then i would agree with you but on balance i'm not able to agree with you um at the moment all right i'm not seeking to persuade you of anything i'm just just trying to
00:09:25 just just trying to to the bottom of what you're prepared to accept uh but looking at the next one down it says we can confirm the certificate zero eight slash four five one zero rainer bond architecture wall cladding
00:09:36 rainer bond architecture wall cladding panels has been the subject of regular three early in reviews by the bba since its update the complaint by the whistleblower employee on the left hand side of the screen is item one i showed you this earlier
00:09:49 is item one i showed you this earlier certificate is subject to regular three yearly reviews is correct but misleading uh and it goes on to say reissues that should have been carried out have not been undertaken so certificate is out of date
00:09:59 date i.e certificate refers to building regulations and nhbc regulations which are out of date and does not refer in any way to updated regulations uh now leaving aside the reasoning there um
00:10:11 now leaving aside the reasoning there um it is right isn't it that a risk reissue should have been carried out far earlier than it had been in uh 2017.
00:10:22 um i think that's a that's a i i don't know the exact chronology but i think that that should be a factual matter if if if reviews were not carried
00:10:34 matter if if if reviews were not carried out
00:10:34 out regularly um at three year intervals then that statement is not correct then if we go down please a little bit further
00:10:46 further in the document on the right hand side of the screen please to page three i'd like just to show you one paragraph towards the bottom of the page there
00:10:57 bottom of the page there it's the penultimate paragraph and it says this let's read with me the standard version was also tested to the british standards bs 476 part 6 1989 and to bs 476 part 7
00:11:09 1989 and to bs 476 part 7 1997 when taken together this means that this product can also be categorized as class naught by the building regulations now i think you accepted earlier let me just
00:11:20 just put it to you again it's correct isn't it that
00:11:23 it that the bba had never seen any test data showing uh that the standard version
00:11:30 version of renault bond 55 pe uh had been tested to standards bs 476 part six or seven again i think that's a matter of fact if
00:11:43 again i think that's a matter of fact if the standard version wasn't and i'm not aware that it was if the standard version was not subject to that process then then it's not accurate to say that in this document
00:11:54 in this document indeed and can you account for uh why the this document did say that the standard version had been tested to be s four seven six part six
00:12:05 tested to be s four seven six part six and seven
00:12:07 and seven and again um i can't uh as as before when we looked at this this morning above it is this the european classification reference and again i just feel that
00:12:19 reference and again i just feel that sometimes people conflate the two so if if one has achieved one categorization or classification um it is assumed ergo that the other
00:12:32 um it is assumed ergo that the other must apply that's that's all i can think of because i think it's twice we've seen that today but i don't know is is the answer well leave aside the european classification
00:12:43 leave aside the european classification um on the assumption uh that the standard version had never been tested at all to bs 476 part six or seven and on the similar assumption that the
00:12:54 and on the similar assumption that the bba had never seen any evidence uh of any such tests do you accept um that the statement made there is erroneous and misleading
00:13:05 on the premise that you've put yes thank you uh mr chairman i've got no further questions uh for this witness
00:13:16 questions uh for this witness uh and therefore it remains for me to thank you mr mall very much for coming to the inquiry and for assisting us with our investigations we're extremely grateful to you
00:13:25 to you thank you forgive me is it possible i can just make um there are four points i would like to make it possible about how how organizations like the bba can be
00:13:36 how organizations like the bba can be helped
00:13:37 helped in the future is it possible to to have a minute to do that or is it mr moore you can have a minute to do that although we've got another witness waiting to be heard
00:13:48 waiting to be heard so i think you i must ask you to keep it quite brief yes thank you mr chairman so my four points
00:13:54 points are as follows the first one that organizations like the bba need to understand that it is more likely than not that some of their clients and the commercial pressure
00:14:06 clients and the commercial pressure will behave unethically and therefore the systems that the bba and organizations like have it about gathering intelligence about malpractice need to be more developed that's point
00:14:17 need to be more developed that's point number one point number two to help the bba in that role
00:14:23 role the current commercial arrangement about um about contracts is too weak the worst that can happen is you tear up a contract and walk away but the public
00:14:34 a contract and walk away but the public can still be at risk i believe that you have received a submission which i endorse from the bba that deliberately misleading a
00:14:45 that deliberately misleading a certification body through act or by a mission and failing to disclose relevant evidence should be a criminal offence because that contract is too weak as
00:14:56 that contract is too weak as it is right thirdly um that testing safety related testing should be mandatory
00:15:06 mandatory and periodic it shouldn't be a matter of good practice that some can adopt and some can't it needs to apply to everybody and all certification bodies are under the same requirement
00:15:17 requirement to have this happen so that there's no race to the bottom if some do it and some don't fourthly and finally that
00:15:28 fourthly and finally that every organization that has safety related products that it manufactures it must have a whistleblower scheme in its organization as part of its
00:15:41 in its organization as part of its conditions of operating and the auditors and regulators review how that whistleblowing policy is being managed and whether there are disclosures coming from it
00:15:52 disclosures coming from it and there is a prescribed body with responsibility for construction products to whom those disclosures are collated and assessed to provide
00:16:03 provide a pitch of intelligence about the ethical health of the industry and able to act upon it in a structured and coherent way in my opinion those things are not
00:16:14 in my opinion those things are not sufficiently evident and and i would ask if the inquiry thinks there's any merit in what i've said
00:16:20 said would it give those points consideration well that's very helpful thank you very much and i can assure you we will take your points into consideration when we come to
00:16:31 we come to making recommendations in due course for the moment it just remains for me to thank you very much on behalf of myself and the panel for coming to give us your evidence it's been really helpful for us to
00:16:43 been really helpful for us to to hear what you have to tell us and we are very grateful indeed so thank you very much
00:16:48 very much and now you are free to go
00:16:52 thank you mr chairman thank you and we shall now have a short break while we organize ourselves for the next witness
00:28:25 welcome back everyone we're now ready to meet our next witness who is mr christopher hunt of the bba and my first task as always is to check
00:28:37 and my first task as always is to check that mr hunt can see me and hear me and is in contact with us so mr hunt are you there yes i am mr chairman yes good afternoon
00:28:48 yes i am mr chairman yes good afternoon good afternoon um i understand that you are willing to make the affirmation and that should appear on your screen in front of you have you got it there i have good then could i ask you to make
00:29:00 i have good then could i ask you to make the affirmation by reading the words on the screen yes i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare
00:29:07 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 now before we get to the point of actually putting some questions to you
00:29:19 putting some questions to you there's just one or two things i need to cover first of all can you confirm that you're alone in the room from which you're giving your evidence
00:29:27 evidence i can thank you can you confirm that you have no documents or other materials with you
00:29:33 with you i can and 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
00:29:44 which is capable of receiving messages uh yes
00:29:44 uh yes i i don't have in either of those things lovely thank you very much indeed now um i hope we shan't have problems with sound or vision you're never quite sure but
00:29:54 but if we do we'll have a short break on the technical support team iron them out um we shall have a scheduled break during the course of the afternoon
00:30:04 afternoon we would normally take it about 3 15. i'm going to suggest that we take it a bit later than that today perhaps half past 3 or shortly thereafter um if you feel that you need a break at
00:30:16 um if you feel that you need a break at any time will you please indicate that and we'll do our best to accommodate you all right um now before i invite council to
00:30:27 um now before i invite council to put some questions to you is there anything you'd like to ask me or anything you'd like to raise uh no i don't think so thank you sir all right thank you very much well in that case i'm going to invite ms troop to uh
00:30:38 case i'm going to invite ms troop to uh ask you some questions yes mr true thank you
00:30:41 you mr hunt good afternoon before i start could i check first please that you can see and hear me clearly yes i can all right can i start then by thanking you
00:30:52 thanking you for attending this public inquiry to give evidence it is very much appreciated i'm going to ask a couple of things of you firstly if you have any difficulty understanding
00:31:03 if you have any difficulty understanding any of the questions that i ask please just say so and i can put the question again or put it in a different way i'm also going to ask you to try to ensure that you keep your voice up
00:31:14 you keep your voice up because there is a transcriber on the pool who's taking down all of your evidence and it's important that she hears it and then lastly for the same reason if
00:31:25 and then lastly for the same reason if you're going to answer yes or no to a question
00:31:27 question please try to do that in words and not with a nod or a shake of their head because obviously that cannot be recorded
00:31:33 recorded on the transcript all right okay mr hunt you provided a witness statement to the inquiry yes yes if we can get that up on the
00:31:44 yes yes if we can get that up on the screen please it's at bba3011087 we're just going to take a look at that together
00:31:52 together just looking at the first page is that your witness statement yes it is if we can go through please to page
00:32:00 page 32 you'll see that there's a signature there at the bottom do you see that yes is that your signature
00:32:10 signature it is and we can see that your witness statement is dated the 20th of january 2020 yes yes have you read your witness statement recently
00:32:21 recently uh yes i have can you confirm that the contents of it are true and accurate yes i can and lastly have you discussed your statement
00:32:31 statement or your evidence with anyone before coming here today no i haven't thank you all right if we go now please to page two of your witness statement
00:32:42 two of your witness statement i'm just going to take you through some of your roles at the bba and your training and if we look please at the table you've provided to us there in the top line here you're setting out
00:32:55 in the top line here you're setting out your
00:32:55 your own qualifications and training yes yes and in the top line you tell us that in 1985
00:33:03 in 1985 you obtained a bachelor of science in physics and acoustics from the university of surrey is that right yes i did and then if we go down please to paragraph five on the same page
00:33:17 you can scroll down a little we learned there that you joined the bba in 1986 as a project manager or product assessor yes yes that's correct and you say that
00:33:30 yes yes that's correct and you say that in relation to that role looking at the first bullet point that you performed assessment testing factory
00:33:37 factory production control and evaluation of construction products with a focus on windows doors cladding and curtain walling heating plumbing and drainage products
00:33:49 heating plumbing and drainage products is that right yes that's right at the second bullet point there you say that during the course of that role you also learnt the assessment certification inspection and testing
00:34:02 certification inspection and testing functions
00:34:03 functions yes yes and then if we go on down please to paragraph six we can see that in 1989 you moved to the role of section head at
00:34:15 you moved to the role of section head at the bba
00:34:17 the bba was that a promotion mr hunt yes it was you remained in that role until 2007 we see and i think is this right you say
00:34:29 we see and i think is this right you say there that you were the technical lead and managing the bba's windows and doors certification business yes uh yes yes there was there was a lot of um there was a lot of work on
00:34:42 a lot of um there was a lot of work on on
00:34:42 on on windows and doors um at that time i became the technical lead in that in that sort of area i see and you say that in that role you
00:34:54 i see and you say that in that role you were managing for product assessors can you help me a product is the role product assessor and project manager the same thing uh yes i think at the
00:35:05 the same thing uh yes i think at the time of that um time when i was um section head the the job title was product assessor um
00:35:13 um it then i can't remember exactly when this was but it became the role name changed to project manager essentially they were
00:35:24 project manager essentially they were the same
00:35:25 the same the same roles um yes i see it was a change yeah thank you we move over to page three of your witness statement now please and to paragraph seven we can see that in 2007
00:35:39 seven we can see that in 2007 you moved into the role of head of approvals yes yes that was head of approvals for the physics what was called the physics team the physics team i see what did
00:35:50 team the physics team i see what did that cover um that it was made up of the it was a new team essentially um approvals team there was quite a big
00:36:03 um approvals team there was quite a big reorganization at the bba at that time to combine a number of smaller sections into larger teams so yes um
00:36:14 into larger teams so yes um that was a combination of the the section that i was head of previously windows doors um and associated products with another section that dealt more with
00:36:26 another section that dealt more with insulation and ventilation products i see thank you so looking at uh
00:36:34 uh what what your role as head of approvals involved
00:36:38 involved you say there that you were that it included uh responsibility for product certification this is in the
00:36:49 for product certification this is in the third line of paragraph seven uh including aggramar and etas of windows doors insulation ventilation and other building fabric products
00:37:00 building fabric products yes yes and at your first bullet point there staying at paragraph seven you say that you were responsible for contract review assignment of work test and assessment
00:37:11 assignment of work test and assessment method development certification decisions and audit of project files yes yes and i think in that role yes in the second line of paragraph seven you tell
00:37:22 second line of paragraph seven you tell us
00:37:23 us that you were then managing 12 project managers
00:37:27 managers yes approximately um it went up and down a little bit during that period but it was about that number yes did those include george lee
00:37:38 did those include george lee uh he did yes what about simon lloyd um i think no i don't think i ever managed time he'd he'd already i
00:37:49 i ever managed time he'd he'd already i think left the bba before i took up that role i see going down now please to paragraph eight you tell us that in 2010 you moved into a different role uh which is called development project
00:38:02 uh which is called development project manager
00:38:03 manager and there are no details there could you just tell us well firstly do you know when in 2010 you moved into that role development project manager i don't exactly um i'm
00:38:16 don't exactly um i'm i'm sorry i don't remember the exact uh date no maybe something that that bba will
00:38:23 will probably have on on on file for personnel records um i think just from memory i'm thinking it would be maybe april time but i could i
00:38:33 i could be wrong on that um and mr i'm sorry just going back up to paragraph seven please into the third line
00:38:42 line in the in your witness statement what is an eta
00:38:46 an eta oh sorry um that is european technical approval
00:38:51 approval i see thank you all right going back now um i'm so sorry to your next role which is development project manager could you just give us a very brief idea of what
00:39:02 just give us a very brief idea of what that role
00:39:02 that role involved um yeah it was it was mainly so outside the mainstream operations teams
00:39:13 operations teams it was looking at future work um particular projects that needed developing before they could go into the operations
00:39:26 teams to do with um a lot of the the emphasis at that time was on sustainability um and to the
00:39:37 um and to the various schemes associated with that carbon saving um the green deal came came in at that sort of time which was you know energy efficiency scheme um
00:39:49 scheme um so there was quite a lot of things going on and
00:39:53 it was something that i found interesting so i decided to uh to take up that role i see did that role just to be clear involve any involvement with the certification
00:40:04 any involvement with the certification of product or approving certificates not not directly no i mean ultimately um it it had a connection obviously with
00:40:15 um it it had a connection obviously with the bba's operational um activities but it was more it was more things looking to the future than
00:40:25 than than the um the the sort of the general run of run of projects yes i see all right if we move down now please still looking at page three of
00:40:36 please still looking at page three of your witness statement to page 10 i'm sorry sorry to paragraph 10. you explained to us there that you left the bba in december 2015 and moved to employment at the bre
00:40:49 2015 and moved to employment at the bre yes yes that's correct are you still employed at the bre i am indeed in what role in in summary what does your role involve summary um
00:41:01 what does your role involve summary um i'm a senior certification project manager
00:41:06 manager working in the security team at bre so my role mainly to do with with testing and certification of
00:41:17 with testing and certification of physical security products i see does it involve the testing and certification in relation uh of products in relation to fire at all
00:41:29 of products in relation to fire at all no it the team is the focus is is essentially entirely on um security either physical or electronic
00:41:40 security either physical or electronic i see all right let's move on to your training
00:41:44 training if we look if we move down now please to paragraph
00:41:47 paragraph uh 11 on page four of your witness statement
00:41:53 statement you explained that that when you first joined the bba in 1986 there was no formal training is that right yes i think that that's um i think that's fair to say um
00:42:06 um i think that's fair to say um there wasn't a formal in in sort of induction
00:42:10 induction training that is more typical um these days but you know that was 1986 so um
00:42:18 um yeah that's probably fairly normal and you say that your knowledge of the building regulations developed over time and within your role at the bba yes
00:42:29 and within your role at the bba yes yes generally you'd build up knowledge in particular product sectors as you were as you were introduced to them and as you as you gained experience and and
00:42:41 as you gained experience and and effectively i suppose the training was mentoring by um by experienced members of staff yes i see all right let's look at paragraph 12
00:42:52 paragraph 12 where you're asked about any training you had in relation to the requirements of the building regulations for the use of combustible materials in buildings over 18 meters and you say
00:43:03 in buildings over 18 meters and you say that
00:43:04 that just starting halfway through the first line
00:43:07 line prior to my role as the head of approvals my knowledge on combustible materials would have been limited do you see that
00:43:16 yes i'm just we're at paragraph 12 and i started reading just halfway along the first line of the word prior yes
00:43:27 yes you then go on to say um in in summary that you had access to a wealth of knowledge
00:43:32 knowledge and a support structure around you and ad hoc
00:43:36 ad hoc training on specialist subjects from other staff yes
00:43:41 can i ask this when you say prior to prior to my role as the head of approvals
00:43:46 approvals that your knowledge on combustible materials was limited what about after that when you stepped into the role of head of approvals of a department which included the
00:43:57 of a department which included the certification of insulation products yes so i obviously it was a fairly steep learning curve um i did david to to learn as much as i
00:44:10 i did david to to learn as much as i could as
00:44:11 could as as as the work permitted really and as as we as we move forward yes from whom did you learn can you remember was was there any particular person
00:44:22 there any particular person to whom you looked for advice or support um at that at that time i remember correctly and
00:44:33 the a lot of the focus um internally at bba and and externally for fire related expertise was um the technical manager at the time who
00:44:45 um the technical manager at the time who who i believe was brian haynes i see um so most most of the most of the knowledge embodied within bba was was was um
00:44:57 was was was um was was brian and his he would look after that and and he would be the first port of call generally for any issues on on fire and then he he would
00:45:09 issues on on fire and then he he would generally you know either either contact external contacts or suggest that um the member staff contacted somebody specific externally yes
00:45:19 yes did you consult brian haynes on fire in relation um to any certificate during your time as head of approvals do
00:45:30 during your time as head of approvals do you remember i i would have thought so um i can't i can't remember sort of absolute specific cases of of that but
00:45:43 absolute specific cases of of that but he yes and anything anything fire related that that was a you know that i wasn't sure about
00:45:50 about or i felt needed some more input probably brian haynes would be the first port of
00:45:57 port of call at that time and can you tell me as head of approval so during um
00:46:04 during um your time in that role what was your knowledge
00:46:08 knowledge if any of the bs 8414 test series at that time i was i was certainly aware of the of of those
00:46:19 i was certainly aware of the of of those standards
00:46:20 standards um i think i knew some of the some of the background if you like as to why they were there and um you know what what what they were
00:46:31 and um you know what what what they were meant to do what did you understand that they were meant to do at the time as a way of of testing as a way of testing a facade
00:46:43 as a way of testing a facade a facade fire scenario of a of a system um rather than a component or or or a particular product it was a a
00:46:55 or a particular product it was a a it was a way of testing an assembled um installation um but i wouldn't pretend to to to know you know any any great depth as to as to
00:47:09 you know any any great depth as to as to you know the the intricacies of the standard
00:47:12 standard i see what about the criteria in br135 i think at the time i'd have been aware of that
00:47:21 of that um i and i probably would have read it at the time um
00:47:27 um i don't know how deep my understanding would have been at the time um and i can't at this point um sort of years later i can't remember
00:47:39 um sort of years later i can't remember the details but certainly i would be aware of
00:47:42 aware of br135 um and that it is referenced you know it was referenced within within the building regulation the proof document at that time yes would you did you know do you think
00:47:55 yes would you did you know do you think in the period that you were head of approval so 2007 to 2010 that uh test data in in from a test to bs 8414 had to be assessed
00:48:07 a test to bs 8414 had to be assessed against criteria in bl-135 i i believe i would have done yes um because because they
00:48:18 um because because they sort of went it hand in hand in that way yes and just going back to what you said a few moments ago about mr haynes and his uh perhaps technical expertise
00:48:30 and his uh perhaps technical expertise in 2007 when you began in your role as head of approvals was brian haynes a qualified fire engineer do you know i don't i i don't believe i'm almost
00:48:42 i don't i i don't believe i'm almost certain
00:48:42 certain he wasn't um and he i'd worked with brian for many many years
00:48:50 years really from the start of my career at bba um
00:48:53 bba um i don't think he would ever have described himself as he certainly would have described himself as a fire engineer and i don't think he ever would have
00:49:04 and i don't think he ever would have really described himself as a as an expert as a fire expert i don't i don't think is it fair for me to say then that he had fallen into that role in a way of being consulted on fire
00:49:16 role in a way of being consulted on fire at the bba despite perhaps not having the qualifications to call himself an expert in that area yes i i believe so um
00:49:28 yes i i believe so um as a i suppose as a bit of background perhaps
00:49:31 perhaps i think that was something that tended to happen at the bba at that time um you know i a lot of a lot of the
00:49:43 um you know i a lot of a lot of the work at bba of project managers you know product assessors um is is a fairly generalist sort of role because you're looking at a wide range of
00:49:54 wide range of performance aspects it that is the nature of bba certificates um so you you but you would build up expertise
00:50:06 you you but you would build up expertise um you know perhaps not formal qualifications but certain individuals and it wasn't a huge organization at that time would would probably be either willingly
00:50:18 would would probably be either willingly or unwillingly be given the mantle of the of the bba sort of authority if you like on that on that particular aspect of performance i think brian
00:50:28 brian whether he want i don't know whether that was his his choice but i think he he ended up occupying that space i see that's helpful thank you i'm going to go on now to ask you about
00:50:40 i'm going to go on now to ask you about kingspan
00:50:41 kingspan and in particular the bba certification of their cool firm k15 insulation product so i want to look first with you uh just briefly at the first issue
00:50:53 just briefly at the first issue of the bba certificate for that product if we can go please to bba
00:51:06 6038
00:51:12 i'm going to come back to look at the content of the certificate with you uh mr hunt but for now i just want to look at the first page if we look at the top right hand corner we can see that this is agramond
00:51:23 we can see that this is agramond certificate 084582 and we can see that it's the cool therm k15 rain screen insulation board yes yes and then if we go please to the
00:51:34 yes and then if we go please to the bottom
00:51:35 bottom left hand side of the document we can see that the date of first issue is the 27th of october 2008. yes yes we then see next to the date
00:51:47 yes yes we then see next to the date two signatures the first i think is yours is it it is yeah as head of approvals physics and then the second signature is um that
00:52:00 and then the second signature is um that of greg cooper who was the chief executive at the time yes are these particular signatures included on the certificate
00:52:12 included on the certificate because you and greg cooper as chief executive
00:52:16 executive ultimately held responsibility on behalf of the bba for this certificate and its content
00:52:25 yes this was a relatively i think at that time
00:52:29 that time um there was a there was a change in format of bba certificates i think around the same time as the um the larger approval teams were
00:52:40 larger approval teams were were um were created um i think prior to that the i think the only signature that appeared on the certificates was the chief executives
00:52:51 certificates was the chief executives um so this was a something that that came in at that time um so i
00:53:01 um so i but so yes i think yes is the is the simple answer to yes um now quite how in certification terms you know when you've got two signatures one
00:53:12 you've got two signatures one generally is the recommending certification and the and then the the second one is is the actual
00:53:20 actual certification decision final um you know authority of of issue yes is it fair for me to say just uh trying
00:53:31 is it fair for me to say just uh trying to understand what it denotes is it fair for me to say that your signature there as head of approval denotes that you have approved the certificate and its content for issue in simple terms yes yes i think it's
00:53:43 in simple terms yes yes i think it's recommend you know recommending the certificate can be issued yes all right can we go please to uh the it's the third witness statement of john
00:53:55 it's the third witness statement of john alban which is at bba three zeros 107 51 and to page eight
00:54:02 there's just something in that witness statement that i want to look at with you
00:54:06 you mr hunt yes so mr alban has provided to the inquiry here a list of all those individuals that he says played some part
00:54:17 that he says played some part in certificate 084582 for k15 and if we go please to the very bottom of that page we can see your name there on the left
00:54:28 we can see your name there on the left as head of approvals yes yes and if we go up on that table uh back to back towards the top of page eight
00:54:39 back towards the top of page eight please
00:54:41 please we can see that the project managers he names are simon lloyd initially and then the second name is george lee
00:54:53 and then the second name is george lee and we see in the next column project manager later to completion do you see that yes i do
00:55:03 we can go to it if we need to but mr alvin was also asked by the inquiry in his witness statement who would have been responsible for checking the wording of this certificate i'm going to call it
00:55:16 of this certificate i'm going to call it issue
00:55:16 issue one of the certificate for k-15 and his answer was that that responsibility lay with you we can go to it if we need to but do you agree with that
00:55:29 agree with that yes i think that that would have been the um
00:55:32 the um the word the wording that uh would have ended up in in the certificate um would have would have been
00:55:39 have been my responsibility to check yes yes all right in in in 2008 october 2008 which is when we've seen uh
00:55:48 seen uh issue one was published to whom did you report
00:55:52 report um i reported to um the operations manager um at the time and who was that that that was
00:56:03 was um that was martin reed i see all right just just for clarity in fact uh so that i don't confuse myself or anyone else there were
00:56:14 confuse myself or anyone else there were in fact
00:56:14 in fact two versions of issue one of the certificate for k-15 do you remember that let's look at if we go please in fact to your witness statement so bba three zeros
00:56:27 statement so bba three zeros 11087 and to page eight
00:56:34 we can see that the first issue which i'm calling issue one is the one we've just looked at dated the 27th of october 2008 do you see that it's in the top
00:56:45 2008 do you see that it's in the top line
00:56:47 line yes and then the next issue down is called amended issue one bears a date of the sixth of april 2010 and carries the same certificate number
00:56:59 and carries the same certificate number yes
00:57:00 yes yes is it right for me to say looking at the third issue down issue two
00:57:07 two of certificate 084582 that was not published until the 17th of december 2013.
00:57:14 2013. you had no involvement in that certificate did you no i changed um changed role uh by that time yes so i'm going to focus
00:57:25 by that time yes so i'm going to focus on the top two certificates there and i'm going to call them issue one and amended issue one so that i don't confuse matters can we look again very briefly at amended issue one and that's at bba
00:57:38 at amended issue one and that's at bba six zeros seven please
00:57:49 it looks almost identical we can see that it's certificate 084582 in the top right hand corner yes yes and then again looking towards the
00:58:00 yes and then again looking towards the bottom left hand side of the page we see data first issue the 27th of october 2008
00:58:06 2008 but in much smaller letters under there we can see the words certificate amended on the 6th of april 2010
00:58:14 2010 with revisions made to scottish building regulations references the behavior in relation to fire and maintenance sections and deletion of the reference to zurich building guarantee
00:58:26 building guarantee technical manual 2007. yes yes and we again see your signature and the signature of greg cooper the chief executive at the time
00:58:38 chief executive at the time yes can i take it from there or is it right
00:58:42 right that you also held ultimate responsibility for checking and approving the wording of this certificate amended issue one
00:58:53 certificate amended issue one uh yes i would have i would have i would have done so um and then the chief executive would have had our chief executive would have had that the authority to um himself make comments or
00:59:07 authority to um himself make comments or will decline an issue with a certificate or it will request changes to it but generally speaking i think it's fair to say that
00:59:16 say that um that wasn't that common no would it be fair for me to characterize your role in terms of this certificate and issue one that we've just
00:59:27 one that we've just looked at as the person were you the person responsible for the technical sign-off decision is that a fair characterization uh yes i
00:59:38 is that a fair characterization uh yes i believe
00:59:38 believe so yes all right i'm going to ask you now some questions about the process of certification if we can go back please to your witness statement at bba3011087
00:59:51 statement at bba3011087 and to page five
00:59:57 you were asked there if we look at the first question at number four in bold do you see that
01:00:06 it says in terms of the wording of final issued certificates are you there mr hunt yes yes all right
01:00:17 are you there mr hunt yes yes all right um and the question was this the first question at 4a who by reference to individuals and or by reference to job titles checks the wording the overall meaning and the potential manner in which
01:00:29 and the potential manner in which each section will be understood or interpreted so the question is being asked in quite a general way uh not about these certificates in particular and your answer
01:00:40 particular and your answer at paragraph 17 is this i'm going to read it with you from my recollection at the time it was internal
01:00:47 internal and external commentators to which drafts had been circulated generally including the approvals manager technical manager bba technical writers the client and
01:00:59 bba technical writers the client and finally the chief executive yes yes could you just uh take that in stages possibly to the best of your recollection and thinking about
01:01:11 of your recollection and thinking about the period uh during which you were head of approval so 2007 to 2010. first of all looking at your answer in paragraph 17
01:01:25 paragraph 17 by whom would drafts be circulated to the people in the roles you list there
01:01:32 there um generally that was done by the um within the sort of the technical writers
01:01:41 writers um function although i think at that time it was it was being the technical writers at that time had become embodied within the approvals teams
01:01:55 embodied within the approvals teams but there was still a feel like a central bba function for um distribution of of of drafts and and collation of of
01:02:06 of drafts and and collation of of comments on on draft certificates yes i see all right let me um wind back a little bit who would produce the first draft of a news certificate so generally that at that time and i
01:02:19 so generally that at that time and i don't
01:02:19 don't think it changed radically between with with the
01:02:23 with the move to larger approvals teams but it generally speaking the the draft of the certificate the initial draft would be prepared by
01:02:34 draft would be prepared by the product assessor project manager usually in conjunction with with a technical writer um at that at that time because the
01:02:45 at that at that time because the technical writers were embedded in the approvals team and were were if you like part of that process of generating the initial draft certificates yes
01:02:57 the initial draft certificates yes all right so when a draft had been produced by product assessor or project manager perhaps with some assistance or some input from a technical writer and will come on to that role can you help us as to what
01:03:10 that role can you help us as to what would ordinarily be the involvement of the head of approvals in 2008 what would you
01:03:16 would you do would a draft be circulated to you for your comments yes i believe so at that time um was that always the case on for every
01:03:28 was that always the case on for every certificate i think there was a again if i remember right i'm not i'm you know this was this was some time ago since i was involved with this process at bba but
01:03:39 involved with this process at bba but um i think at that time it not neces wouldn't necessarily be in first instance a formal circulation it would be a relatively
01:03:51 circulation it would be a relatively informal
01:03:52 informal within the within the team um the project manager technical writer would come up with an initial draft they'd probably at that stage um share it with with the approvals
01:04:05 um share it with with the approvals manager
01:04:06 manager um for some input if if um if necessary at that at that stage so it was
01:04:13 was still probably a relatively informal um part of the drafting at that stage yes i was going to ask you about that when you use the term approvals manager is that are you talking about yourself
01:04:25 is that are you talking about yourself as head of approvals yes i was talking about the general so that would be the same process in any of those
01:04:34 those i think there was three approvals teams at that time so it would be the same process within within each of those approvals teams um you know with their own looking at
01:04:45 um you know with their own looking at their own
01:04:46 their own um subject areas really yes so the project managers um who worked under you for example george lee do i have this right he would uh perhaps put together a draft
01:05:00 he would uh perhaps put together a draft and then possibly informally send it to you for your comments is that right yes that's right yeah and then later would come a stage where on a
01:05:12 then later would come a stage where on a more formal basis uh perhaps closer to being finalized draft was circulated more widely is that fair
01:05:20 fair yes that's that's correct all right so i i think
01:05:23 i think trying to cut to it really was there ever i'm trying to work out whether that is what happened on every single occasion and i perhaps the best way for me to ask it is this was there ever an occasion where
01:05:34 this was there ever an occasion where you as head of approvals received on your desk or on your laptop a finalized draft certificate for approval for checking and signing
01:05:45 approval for checking and signing without
01:05:46 without ever having seen a draft of that document previously or having commented on it does that make sense
01:05:54 sense i think so yes um no i think i think i think that's correct generally speaking and i i couldn't say for sure whether this was
01:06:05 whether this was was always the case in in every situation but by memory of the time which as i say is a little while ago now so
01:06:13 so i'm aware that um you know it could be slightly unreliable but um i think it would generally be the case that
01:06:23 that that the head of approvals would have seen a would have seen a draft an initial draft um certainly uh you know probably several
01:06:32 several drafts um before before actually seeing the final thing yes i see that's helpful can we go back to your witness statement please at page five and uh paragraph 20.
01:06:50 actually at the question just above so this is inquiry question five you're being asked in particular there
01:06:58 there i'll read it in fact in terms of the veracity
01:07:01 veracity and or accuracy of test results cited within a bba certificate who by reference to individuals and or job titles checks the wording the overall meaning
01:07:13 checks the wording the overall meaning and so on
01:07:14 and so on and you say essentially it's just the same answer in fact the product assessor
01:07:20 assessor technical writer approvals manager technical manager the manufacturer and internal and external commentators if applicable just ensure that i understand you do you
01:07:32 just ensure that i understand you do you mean that each of those individuals everyone in those roles that you have listed would have checked the accuracy or veracity
01:07:42 veracity of test results cited in a bba certificate they um
01:07:51 they they would yeah perhaps i need to split that up in a way um in terms of checking the the absolute at the accuracy of test results that would
01:08:01 would generally have been done by the the project the product assessor or the project manager you know maybe in in with the approvals
01:08:12 you know maybe in in with the approvals manager
01:08:13 manager might have involved the technical manager if if it was the necessary um but then in terms of the wording and so that's the actual test results themselves
01:08:24 themselves yes in terms of checking the meaning of the wording that could be a little bit wider because of because a bba certificate is they're quite wordy things rather
01:08:35 is they're quite wordy things rather than being a very short certificate which some certification obviously is um there's very wordy things so in terms of checking the wording and the
01:08:46 in terms of checking the wording and the way that could be you know read um then then obviously others others would do that although they might not be checking the actual test results yes i
01:08:57 checking the actual test results yes i understand so you said uh in that answer that checking the accuracy of test results would generally have been done by the project manager and maybe with the approvals manager yes
01:09:10 the approvals manager yes uh yes yes so um did you say technical manager as well no you i think you your answer was product assessor or project manager and yes i'm so sorry and then you did say possibly involving the technical
01:09:22 say possibly involving the technical manager
01:09:23 manager my question really is this and in fact it's been asked of you in your witness statement at the next question down the question there at the very bottom of the page we're looking at under paragraph 20 is how are these
01:09:35 under paragraph 20 is how are these checks carried out and if we can go to your answer please which is over on page six you say that by draft certificate circulation to the then current bba procedures
01:09:49 current bba procedures and you then are asked who has responsibility for the veracity and or accuracy of the test
01:09:56 test results cited and at paragraph 22 you say data was either internal bba test data
01:10:05 test data or ucas accredited or subject to checking
01:10:08 checking in accordance with the then current bba procedure
01:10:12 procedure so my question is a very simple one it's this what
01:10:16 this what was the procedure for checking the accuracy
01:10:19 accuracy or veracity of test results cited in a bba certificate whoever did that
01:10:26 that what was the procedure you're referring to here
01:10:30 to here so at the time i think there was a um i couldn't tell you that the the number of it or the or a reference but i think within the
01:10:41 or a reference but i think within the within the bba's documented procedures there was a there was a procedure for checking um accuracy of of test results yes fine
01:10:53 of test results yes fine what was it oh i i'm sorry i don't recall in in detail it was a written procedure um mainly mainly sort of and
01:11:04 procedure um mainly mainly sort of and it gave you a gave you the the the how you should how you should check those results you know based on the provenance of the of the data whether it was ucas
01:11:15 of the data whether it was ucas accredited or not um whether it was felt to be representative of of that product there was quite a number of
01:11:24 of different aspects to that procedure but i see
01:11:28 i see i'm sorry i can't remember what the reference
01:11:32 reference number of that procedure was at the time it would be in the bba's manuals from from from that time fine no there's no reason you'd remember the reference number
01:11:43 reference number um would those procedures or or the steps that you've listed involve actually reading the test reports on which
01:11:54 which the test results cited in a bba certificate were based yes yes generally yes would there be any other way to check the accuracy or veracity of test data i think it would depend on
01:12:08 of test data i think it would depend on the
01:12:08 the on the it would depend on the type of testing
01:12:11 testing um would it how certain
01:12:17 let me put it in this way in what circumstances could you check the accuracy or veracity of any test data
01:12:25 data without reading it i think yeah you you the data would need to be read yes yes all right thank you
01:12:36 right thank you just looking please at your answer at paragraph 22 there's something i would just like to make clear with you you say their
01:12:43 their data and this is a reference to test data was
01:12:46 data was either internal bba test data what does that mean what would internal bba
01:12:53 bba test data be
01:12:56 um so that yeah perhaps some explanation would be helpful here i'm sorry i didn't detail it more in my witness statement the the at that
01:13:07 my witness statement the the at that time
01:13:08 time um i think it was fair to say that most most test data particularly on a lot of aspects like durability testing um
01:13:19 aspects like durability testing um you know quite mechanical testing a lot of testing was actually done within the bba's own uh laboratories and in in that case the the test data
01:13:31 and in in that case the the test data was generally taken to be you know acceptable and accurate because it was generated by the the the bba um themselves
01:13:42 the the bba um themselves yes and then ucas accredited looking again
01:13:46 again at paragraph 22 of your witness statement
01:13:51 statement that means test data from a ucas accredited test house does it yes so as a if you like as a hierarchy of acceptability should we say
01:14:05 internal test data was was perhaps the easiest to to um to accept um failing that then for
01:14:16 failing that then for tests that were the bba didn't perform themselves um it would be ucas accreditation uh of the laboratory to the standard that was of interest
01:14:28 that was of interest would be the the the next the next step down
01:14:31 down um failing that then there was some checking checking guidance i think in the procedure um which which would was then also
01:14:43 um which which would was then also another another route to to accepting data yes i see but in terms of the hierarchy of acceptability that you've described do i understand you correctly to be saying this
01:14:55 saying this if it was internal bba test data it needn't be subject to further checks because it was already your data yes essentially yes i think i mean there
01:15:06 yes essentially yes i think i mean there might
01:15:06 might have been some caveats to that if but i think generally yes um you know it was
01:15:14 was it was bba test data and and therefore generally accepted as being accurate
01:15:21 accurate yes and then does the same apply to ucas accredited test data because you say
01:15:28 say it may just be the wording but you say data was either internal bba test data or ucas accredited or subject to checking
01:15:37 checking so do i take it from that that ucas accredited test data was not subject to checking i think it was it was still subject to
01:15:49 i think it was it was still subject to to checking that it it related it was an appropriate standard and it related to um and it related to the product in
01:16:01 um and it related to the product in question
01:16:01 question um so but in terms of the actual accuracy of the data um generally speaking ucas accredited
01:16:12 um generally speaking ucas accredited uh labs to to that to those to the standard that was was of interest would be accepted without without further checking
01:16:22 yes all right i want to ask you now please about how uh decisions about a certificate or or test results to be included were documented during the process of
01:16:33 documented during the process of certification and to try to take that shortly if we can go again please to the third witness statement of john alban which is bba
01:16:44 alban which is bba 3010751
01:16:45 3010751 and to page five
01:16:51 if we look at paragraph 18 please mr hunt i'm just going to read this with you
01:16:58 you he says that during the drafting process the checks made and subsequent authorizations are documented on a certificate traveller log the layout and style of this document
01:17:09 the layout and style of this document has evolved over time but the principle has always been to ensure
01:17:14 ensure that the responsibility for all stages of the process is documented and that a certificate can only be issued after the content has been checked and the publication
01:17:25 the publication formally authorized by a suitably experienced and competent individual my first question is this do you agree with him that that was the principle
01:17:36 with him that that was the principle in operation during your time as head of approvals
01:17:42 approvals yes i believe so that seems to um that seems to record with with with with what i think would have been the process at that time
01:17:53 the process at that time all right
01:17:57 before uh the first issue of issue before issue one of the certificate for k-15 had you at any stage had any prior involvement with kingston
01:18:09 involvement with kingston or in particular with certification for any of their insulation products um i can't remember exactly um i think there was a there was
01:18:21 um i think there was a there was certainly
01:18:22 certainly quite a number of kingspan products i believe already so um certificated at that time
01:18:30 that time yes there would have been quite a number of kingspan products um being or assessment projects related to kingsband products i think at that time you know they they were big
01:18:43 at that time you know they they were big a big mac they're a big manufacturer of construction products um particularly in the insulation sector and um
01:18:50 and um they would do it would have been quite a number i think i don't know what that would have been exactly no i see all right mr lee george lee who we seem to have
01:19:01 george lee who we seem to have established was the project manager for issue one
01:19:04 issue one of the k-15 certificate has told us in his witness statement i don't think we need to go to it but he has told us that he was
01:19:12 he was uh or that most of the kingspan insulation products which were certificated by the bba at the time
01:19:20 the time uh were being worked on by him so would you have been supervising his work on those insulation certificates other kingspend products
01:19:31 products in terms of yeah overall in terms of the management of of the team um i would have been supervising him in terms of a perhaps a technical capacity um
01:19:45 perhaps a technical capacity um now i i don't know about formal competence and and whether that comes up but he he had was much more experienced than
01:19:56 he he had was much more experienced than i was in terms of experience of insulation products and the assessment and testing of those than i would have been what leads you to say that he was much
01:20:07 what leads you to say that he was much more experienced than you were in those areas
01:20:10 areas um he'd he'd he he was in the previous section um headed up by sonia marshall which was which was the bba so that we feel like
01:20:22 which was the bba so that we feel like insulation and ventilation section so the the they dealt with really all those all those
01:20:31 those products up until that time so until the combination of the approvals teams the project managers that came across from that team were the ones with the experience on
01:20:43 experience on insulation products and i think probably at that time george would have been sonia marshall retired i can't remember exactly when that was but that would
01:20:54 exactly when that was but that would have been
01:20:54 have been probably around that time um so george was the if you like most experienced on on on insulation products now i don't know how
01:21:05 how that would be defined in informal competence term no all right that's helpful
01:21:13 helpful can you remember when you first became aware
01:21:16 aware that a certificate was going to be prepared for kingspan's k15 product
01:21:24 um i think well i would have when i became the head of approvals and the
01:21:31 the the projects that were on the books if you like in the in the sony it's on your section um that was one of the projects that would have come across
01:21:42 would have come across um and i believe it it had already been going
01:21:46 going some time before before then so yeah i guess the awareness would have been at the time when when the um the new approvals team as it
01:21:58 when the um the new approvals team as it were were formed and the projects were already on the books shall we say yes i i think that's right that it was an ongoing project at the time you became head of approvals in
01:22:10 time you became head of approvals in 2007
01:22:11 2007 and we'll come on to look at some correspondence about that did you see given that it was an ongoing project did you see a contract or agreement
01:22:22 agreement between the bba and kingspan in respect of a certificate for k-15 at any stage
01:22:34 i i i can't be absolutely sure of that because
01:22:38 because the at that time a lot of stuff was stood on paper um i think so there would have been obviously a there would have been a file with the contract on
01:22:49 contract on um whether i would have looked at it when when the files were sort of uh handed over as it were um
01:22:59 um i can't recall um all right in fact i didn't have any involvement obviously with the production or um review or acceptance of that contract
01:23:10 review or acceptance of that contract that was done yeah it was a few years i think before before i was involved yes all right when did you first discuss the matter this a certificate
01:23:22 discuss the matter this a certificate being prepared for k-15 with a project manager can you remember that
01:23:27 that um i believe i believe it would have been with george lee i can't remember when it would have been it may have been
01:23:38 it may have been fairly early on when when um the the approvals team was was formed um [Music]
01:23:45 [Music] at some stage it would have i would have um
01:23:49 um becoming knowledge of it but i i couldn't say when yes all right were there as far as you can remember before you came to the stage of reviewing the certificate for approval
01:24:02 reviewing the certificate for approval discussions or meetings between you and george lee as to any aspect of the content of the certificate i i would have thought so
01:24:14 i i would have thought so but i can't recall anything specific um generally with most projects the the the project manager
01:24:25 manager product assessor would affect would have ongoing conversations with the with the head of approvals um as a day-to-day it's a day-to-day thing all right what
01:24:36 it's a day-to-day thing all right what documents
01:24:37 documents did you have available to you when you came to the stage of reviewing issue one of the bba certificate for k-15
01:24:45 k-15 for approval
01:24:49 i mean i can't remember exactly from from memory um but it would have been essentially whatever was in the was in
01:25:00 essentially whatever was in the was in the technical file um plus any i don't know notes or or other material that there might have been but
01:25:08 been but essentially what was in the technical file and was that the ordinance so ordinarily when you came as head of approvals to the stage of actually reviewing a certificate for approval and signature
01:25:20 approval and signature um is that what you would ordinarily expect to have in front of you the contents of the technical file and any other
01:25:28 any other notes or materials i think you said yes yes plus plus any any discussions or meetings or um you know knowledge that
01:25:39 meetings or um you know knowledge that that
01:25:41 that that i may have had at that at that time yes what about correspondence with the manufacturer would you expect that to be on the file i don't correspondence at that time wouldn't necessarily some of the
01:25:53 wouldn't necessarily some of the correspondence certainly letters would have been on the file at that time um emails
01:26:02 um emails perhaps emails perhaps printed copies of emails but not not necessarily every every email i don't
01:26:11 don't think at that time that may have changed at bba
01:26:15 at bba subsequently uh my experience obviously only goes
01:26:18 only goes so far mr hunt i'm going to pause you there
01:26:22 there just because i'm looking at the time and wondering
01:26:25 wondering um passing back to the chairman whether this might be an appropriate time for a short break yes well i think he probably wouldn't it mr hunt we'll have a short break now um i think we could start again of
01:26:37 um i think we could start again of course to four please and while we're having our break please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it all right i understand
01:26:48 relating to it all right i understand very good thank you we'll see you at quarter four thank you good thank you very much
01:40:08 welcome back everyone we're now going to resume hearing from mr hunt so i'm just going to check that mr hunt can see me and hear me all right you there mr hunt i can indeed sir yes
01:40:20 mr hunt i can indeed sir yes very good and you're ready to carry on i hope hi i am good thank you very much well in that case miss troupe um when you're ready thank you mr hunt i'm going to
01:40:31 thank you mr hunt i'm going to um take you back to your witness statement if we can go to that please at bba3011087 and to page eight
01:40:46 if we look please at paragraph 31 we can see that you have been asked when it was
01:40:53 it was that kingspan first contacted the bba in relation
01:40:57 relation to the potential certification of k-15 do you see that question i do yes and you say that you don't remember
01:41:05 remember but you've been shown an email dated the 23rd of october 2003 which would appear to indicate first contact yes yes let's go to that email please that's
01:41:17 yes let's go to that email please that's at bba
01:41:20 301108
01:41:26 if we look at the top email if we could blow that up a little bit please we can see an email from iva meredith of kingspan
01:41:34 kingspan to bob keys at the bba and it's dated friday the 24th of october 2003. yes yes and we can see that
01:41:46 yes and we can see that this subject is possible new bba assessment and he's attached some pdfs one about cool thumb k15 and one about a thermofloor product tf 70. do you see
01:42:00 a thermofloor product tf 70. do you see that
01:42:01 that i do yes and then if we look at mr meredith's email he says this bob as requested by philip please find and close the tf70 literature
01:42:12 and close the tf70 literature this same situation applies to our k-15 which is the same specification as k8 and k7 could
01:42:23 and k7 could could you presumably also provide a quote and time scale for this yes yes have you been referred to were you shown this email um in the
01:42:35 to were you shown this email um in the course of preparing your witness statement for the inquiry or is it an email that you think you saw at the time in 2007 or 2008 i don't remember it i don't remember
01:42:47 i don't remember it i don't remember seeing it at the time in 2007 2008 um yes i believe it's the email that um that i saw um recently um you know when when doing
01:42:59 um recently um you know when when doing the witness statement yes and and do you think it's right for me to take from this that the products mr meredith mentions in the second line of his email k8 and k7 were at that time in 2003
01:43:13 k8 and k7 were at that time in 2003 already the subject of bba certificates they they may have been um i can't i can't i can't recall fully from the time but i i it
01:43:26 recall fully from the time but i i it sounds likely from that but i'm i'm speculating all right do you know whether after this email from mr meredith kingspan were at any stage asked
01:43:40 kingspan were at any stage asked to provide any data or evidence to back up
01:43:44 up what mr meredith says there which is that k-15 is the same specification as k-7 and k-8 i i don't i don't remember i can't
01:43:57 i i don't i don't remember i can't remember if i've seen anything um would you ex sorry go ahead oh sorry i was just going to say um [Music]
01:44:08 [Music] that they they it would have um once once there was once the bba was in contract i think or maybe prior is possible um i think at the time
01:44:23 is possible um i think at the time simon lloyd would have been the initial project manager and sonia marshall would have been involved what they saw at the time or what what was
01:44:33 was taken on what was seen before the contract was prepared i i i wouldn't know all right let me put it in this way would you expect more to have been done
01:44:45 would you expect more to have been done by the bba then um for either meredith's word on this
01:44:50 this that k15 was the same specification as k8 and k7
01:44:55 k8 and k7 would you expect more to have been done than for that to be accepted at face value i think i think i'm normally i'm talking sort of
01:45:06 i think i'm normally i'm talking sort of you know from my own experience i don't know for sure in this instance but i i excuse me generally i think that would
01:45:17 excuse me generally i think that would that begs the question and and would be explored
01:45:21 explored in some way whether whether that would be
01:45:24 be verbally you know phone call or emails or
01:45:29 or meeting or generally yes it would be it would be
01:45:33 would be explored i see all right
01:45:39 can we go now uh very briefly to a copy of the contract which was signed between the bba and kingspan for the certification of k-15 that's at bb-830-107-455
01:45:59 that's at bb-830-107-455 so we can see there uh on the cover page it's certificate contract and the applicant details are given at the top that's kingspan yes yes
01:46:11 at the top that's kingspan yes yes there are then some details of the subject of the contract uh addresses and relevant fees if we go on please to page four of this document
01:46:24 we can see that it's been signed in august 2004 on behalf of the applicant that's the top signature and we know that signature uh to be that
01:46:35 and we know that signature uh to be that of iva meredith of kingspan do you know who it is that has signed on the 16th of august 2004 on behalf of the bba
01:46:45 bba yes i think i do but i believe um looking at that signature um i think that was a gentleman called john miles i see who
01:46:57 called john miles i see who worked in in the i think at the time it would have been called mark the marketing or sales and marketing department i see all right now given that this certificate was signed off by the bba on
01:47:08 certificate was signed off by the bba on the 16th of august 2004 and that we know that issue one of the certificate bears the date 27th of october 2008 it seems that the process of getting to
01:47:21 it seems that the process of getting to an issued certificate took just over four years yes yes do you have any idea why that was i mean that that is um that is it is a
01:47:34 i mean that that is um that is it is a long
01:47:35 long it is a long time um i don't i can't recall any and he's he's generally longer than would be expected for
01:47:44 for for this type of assessment um at that time
01:47:48 time i see i don't recall what you know what what what the circumstances were before i was involved um but
01:47:59 involved um but it i think it probably fair to say and i don't know the exact numbers but at the time when sonia marshall retired and i became approvals manager there was quite a
01:48:11 approvals manager there was quite a backlog of of work um the it was there was a lot of work in the insulation sector had come in and and i think i think there
01:48:22 come in and and i think i think there was there was there was a lot of work on the books like if i remember writing when you stepped into the role as head of approvals yes i see all right and so then
01:48:33 yes i see all right and so then one of your first jobs presumably was to work through that backlog yes indeed um i think i don't know if this background is useful or or not but
01:48:44 useful or or not but for memory at the time i think one of the rationales between creating three larger approvals teams rather than a larger number of
01:48:55 teams rather than a larger number of smaller sections was mainly business efficiency into and to try and
01:49:01 try and um you know run i mean put it bluntly get get through the work and and um you know keep keep keep uh keep things moving yes i see
01:49:13 keep uh keep things moving yes i see all right in 2008 when you were head of approvals
01:49:17 approvals were records kept um recording who had contributed to a certificate and in what way
01:49:28 certificate and in what way um
01:49:31 not formally i don't think other than names appearing on the file um or the technical file and so signatures
01:49:42 or the technical file and so signatures on things like contracts and and documents um i think at correspondence obviously i don't think there was a formal log as such uh kept
01:49:56 formal log as such uh kept it would mainly be from from those whose who's uh who were whose names are involved and um and and come up in that way all right
01:50:07 and and come up in that way all right we spoke uh earlier or i referred you earlier to a section of john alban's third witness statement where he mentioned a document called the certificate traveler log i want to look at that with
01:50:18 traveler log i want to look at that with you
01:50:18 you um for the log for issue one of k-15 that is at bba 3011090
01:50:36 please
01:50:44 right so we see at the top certificate traveler log and this has been filled out manually yes yes
01:50:53 yes yes what is the purpose or what was the purpose please in 2008 of a certificate traveler log um i think it was if i remember rightly this will in this
01:51:07 rightly this will in this format was relatively new um to the to the for the when the new approvals teams were created um i think there was there was something
01:51:20 um i think there was there was something similar in place before then but i can't remember exactly how it differed from this and i think it was this was
01:51:29 this was if i remember correctly put into place just as a as a way of sort of keeping track of of where draft certificates um got to who who'd um you know who who'd done
01:51:43 who who'd um you know who who'd done done what on those drafts and just to record those those um steps i see all right well let's take a look at this one together we can see that the product name in the
01:51:55 we can see that the product name in the top line is given as cool firm k15 rain screen insulation board and then under that we see details for kingspan insulation on the right hand side the contact name
01:52:08 on the right hand side the contact name at kingspan is given as gareth mills do you see that yes i do yes that's the left no right hand side and then under that i
01:52:19 no right hand side and then under that i think we see um next to project manager george lee
01:52:25 yes and then richard ball is recorded as the technical writer yes yes this is something you referred to earlier but i want to check it with you despite the
01:52:36 i want to check it with you despite the title technical writer is it correct for me to say that the role did not in fact involve any technical input into the content of certificates
01:52:49 in in yes in in general terms yes it did so technical not in terms of
01:53:00 so technical not in terms of of have been um having any technical responsibility for the
01:53:07 the for the um the the technical judgments if you like um but they did they did have quite an input in
01:53:16 input in um in the format of the certificate the way that the building regulations were referenced in a in a sort of standard way so they had quite a lot of
01:53:27 quite a lot of input into um the process but not not with a with a not with a technical responsibility but with a with
01:53:38 technical responsibility but with a with a responsibility i suppose of ensuring that the consistency and the readability i suppose of the certificates and they followed a consistent format
01:53:50 they followed a consistent format because that was always you know could be an issue in in in for certificates yes mr hunt the way john alban puts it in his third witness statement and we can go to this
01:54:01 statement and we can go to this if if we need to is input is restricted to maintaining a consistent bba style and correct grammar no technical input or discretion
01:54:13 or discretion does that accord with your recollection of that role technical writer yes i i think essentially yes um some might have had more input than others some of them were
01:54:24 more input than others some of them were quite experienced so um you know were quite good at picking up anomalies or or even they had no responsibility technically
01:54:35 they had no responsibility technically but that often they were part of they were certainly part of the process of kind of getting certificates in a in good order as it were looking back please at the log in the
01:54:48 looking back please at the log in the top section do you see on the right hand side under the names we've just looked at there's a section in brackets starting jobcon fs
01:54:58 do you see that yes and then if we read along the handwritten section there i think it gives the department uh which is yours
01:55:06 is yours physics and then the contract number or agreement number and then does that say nine drafts at the end of that line i i believe so yes
01:55:17 yes i think i would i would read that as nine drafts does that indicate to you looking at it now that there were nine drafts of the certificate for k-15
01:55:28 certificate for k-15 no if i remember correctly um and i'm hoping i do but um i think within within the within the electronic
01:55:39 within within the within the electronic folders on on the on the network drive um
01:55:46 so i think it was various uh folders within within that project overall project folder and i think section
01:55:55 section or folder number nine was was draft
01:56:08 yes i see thank you if we go down now please to section one certificate details we can see that the word uh standard has been circled
01:56:19 been circled do you see that yes i do what does that mean
01:56:24 mean i think that the bba at that time had various
01:56:29 various series of of of certificates um so most certificates were standard um bba agremont certificate um hapas was to do with highways
01:56:44 um hapas was to do with highways right work i think roads and bridges again was
01:56:47 again was specific to sort of civil engineering yes work and then eta i think we mentioned you know we spoke about earlier is european technical approval
01:56:58 technical approval thank you and and then moving down please can you see uh at section 1.4 circulation type the word follower has been circled
01:57:09 the word follower has been circled yes and after that we see the words designated leader certificate number 084549 yes what does the word follower being circled
01:57:20 circled denote oh okay so i think i think at the time it was um so it depends on the route of the
01:57:31 so it depends on the route of the circulation route that the certificate went on and i think it could be
01:57:36 could be adjusted as well but i think essentially a leader certificate went to on a on a wider circulation of commentators whereas a follower was
01:57:48 commentators whereas a follower was was a a restricted number of people um and and it was because it wasn't that you know it wasn't
01:57:58 it wasn't deemed if you like necessary to send it on the wider wider route yes all right and then uh staying with section 1.4 i i think that is your signature is it
01:58:09 i i think that is your signature is it dated the 19th of june 2008. yes sorry yes i'll cut across you then yes
01:58:18 yes all right and then if we move down please to section two in this log
01:58:30 yeah we can see a section entitled technical completion of assessment and it reads declarations that certificate is technically complete initials and date the project manager uh there has signed
01:58:42 the project manager uh there has signed do you know who signature that is
01:58:46 um so project manager
01:58:51 i i believe i believe that was george lee but it's not you know i can't be 100 sure because it's not
01:58:59 it's not so illegible great and then we see the technical writer and that seems to read uh
01:59:04 uh our ball for richard ball and then is that your signature head of approvals at the third line uh yes it is yes um is it right for me
01:59:16 uh yes it is yes um is it right for me to say that inside by signing this document you were essentially signing off to say that you were satisfied that all the specifications within the certificate
01:59:28 specifications within the certificate were accurate i believe so yes at the time at the time of in that in the in the procedure that that was in place then as far as i can remember
01:59:39 then as far as i can remember and that all data requested by kingspan had been provided yes i think that would be the that would be the uh
01:59:48 be the uh the assumption yeah and that all supplied test data had been scrutinized by the bba essentially yes i believe so and that
01:59:59 essentially yes i believe so and that all technical content had been checked as
02:00:01 as adequate and accurate uh yes again i think that's that was the that was the assumption there yes
02:00:12 that was the assumption there yes all right i want to go now please um in some more detail to issue one if we can go back to bba six zeros 38 please
02:00:27 six zeros 38 please and if we look at page one looking at product scope and summary of certificate which is in the the first light blue box at the top of the page
02:00:39 the page we can see that that reads this certificate relates to cool therm k-15 rain screen insulation board a rigid phenolic board with foil composite facings for use as external thermal insulation
02:00:51 for use as external thermal insulation on new
02:00:51 on new and existing steel frame or masonry walls
02:00:56 walls the board is used in domestic and non-domestic buildings in conjunction with
02:00:59 with masonry or weather-type ventilated cladding systems does that accord with your understanding of k-15 as a product at the time as far as you can recall
02:01:12 at the time as far as you can recall that description yes as far as far as i can recall yes what did you know about k-15 at the time
02:01:20 time whilst it was being certificated um i think i mean i knew it was part of the courthouse range of phenolic boards and there was
02:01:31 range of phenolic boards and there was there was quite a there's quite a family of those for for various
02:01:36 various applications um i think some of them were already certificated but i think as mentioned earlier i can't remember exactly which ones i'm in
02:01:48 can't remember exactly which ones i'm in which
02:01:49 which uh use um
02:01:52 uh use um all right yeah that's that suspect is that is that is that enough yes thank you all right let's move on down now please do you see uh the second heading in bold which reads key factors
02:02:03 reads key factors assessed
02:02:07 so just going down the page a little do you see those words key factors assessed
02:02:14 assessed yes i do yeah and first we have thermal performance in bold and then condensation risk and then the section i want to take you to is behavior in relation to fire
02:02:26 do you see that i do yes that reads the boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire or present a smoke or toxic hazard
02:02:38 or present a smoke or toxic hazard so looking at the first part of of that assertion the boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire my simple question is this what does that phrase mean
02:02:56 i i mean i think he i would read it as it is is there but i don't know i don't know if it had any more if there
02:03:08 i don't know if it had any more if there was intended to be any meaning to it other than than that it won't contribute to the development stages of fire but it's it's a slightly well
02:03:20 it's a slightly well perhaps a slightly ambiguous statement yes
02:03:23 yes why do you say that it's slightly ambiguous perhaps um i'm not quite sure you know in the context of the content
02:03:34 you know in the context of the content in the
02:03:34 in the sort of context of the approved documents i'm not quite sure what it would would mean i mean
02:03:43 mean bba certificates don't only cover building regulations requirements as such but um i think i think it was it was probably meant to mean that it
02:03:55 it was probably meant to mean that it you know it doesn't contribute to the early stages of a fire right and do you think that was your understanding at the time that you signed off this
02:04:06 at the time that you signed off this certificate that it was essentially intended as red the boards will not contribute to the early stages of a fire i'm one thing that you're having having obviously not not
02:04:17 you're having having obviously not not really
02:04:18 really looked at it for many years until recently
02:04:22 recently and then and then looking at it for for the inquiry yeah um i'm not quite sure it's um just as a i don't know if this is okay but just as a
02:04:34 is okay but just as a bit of context or background this this key factor success was a rather it was the format of the certificate was changed
02:04:42 changed um around that time or not too uh long before before this this time um and that was that this key fact success was added in as a
02:04:53 fact success was added in as a as a new a new uh feature of the format um and it was meant to be a sort of a a few little quick bullet points
02:05:04 a few little quick bullet points um but i don't i mean thinking about it now i'm not sure in a way how helpful it it it was or is um in the the
02:05:15 it was or is um in the the you know elsewhere b raised to the bits it usually says somewhere and i can't remember exactly where that certificate should always be read in their entirety so yes it's almost it's almost we've
02:05:26 so yes it's almost it's almost we've shot
02:05:26 shot ourselves in the foot perhaps by by sort of
02:05:30 of having a summary you know and and that that
02:05:33 that may lead people to not read the full certificate um give my jumping in mr hunt and youtube please miss troop but um someone actually sat down and chose those words i imagine
02:05:46 and chose those words i imagine and are we to understand from your earlier
02:05:50 earlier evidence that that was probably mr lee i i i would to best of my knowledge i believe
02:05:58 believe so so he he chose those words whether he was helped to choose them by anything else we may discover at a later stage but
02:06:09 discover at a later stage but my next question is you you then at some point read this certificate yes yes did you did you scrutinize those words in other words did you
02:06:20 words in other words did you read them and ask yourself what does this mean
02:06:25 i don't remember exactly how i read them at the time reading them you know now i'm i'm not quite sure exactly why it was
02:06:37 i'm not quite sure exactly why it was there but
02:06:38 there but because normally the that key factors assessed summary would would be a repetition you know albeit briefly of something that appears in the in the main section of the certificate so
02:06:51 main section of the certificate so it's it's slightly unusual i would say and probably not that helpful that the wording in the in the key factors assessed is not
02:07:02 in the key factors assessed is not mirrored in the in the main section so i understand i understand that
02:07:07 that my question was did you scrutinize them and ask yourself what does this mean and i think your answer is you can't remember doing so is that right yes i i think i mean i
02:07:19 is that right yes i i think i mean i would have read it um and scrutinize it at the time i can't now remember what my thinking thoughts were on that and
02:07:30 and whether whether i read anything into that
02:07:33 that particularly other than that you then needed to refer to section seven to get the full story all right well and that i understand it's quite a long time ago all right thank you that that's helpful mr upon
02:07:44 thank you that that's helpful mr upon you
02:07:44 you thank you i think i understand uh you to be saying that you don't remember what your reaction was to that particular wording at the time but that you would have looked at it
02:07:56 do you think you understood it at the time i appreciate that you were saying it may have been intended to be a reference
02:08:01 reference to other sections within the body of the certificate but that aside taking those words just as they look on the front page
02:08:12 the front page do you think there is anything you could have understood about the meaning of them
02:08:15 them in 2008 that you cannot see now
02:08:20 um in in in what way sorry let me put it in this way
02:08:27 way as far as you are aware is that wording derived from any particular test standard or guidance or part of the building regulations
02:08:41 i don't believe i might you know i can't remember
02:08:46 remember exactly what i would have taken from it at the time but um i think at the time and now i i wouldn't necessarily
02:08:57 now i i wouldn't necessarily take that as as being any particular reference
02:09:01 reference or or any significance to the the actual wording of the approved documents no how is contribution to the development
02:09:12 how is contribution to the development stages of a fire measured do you know um
02:09:20 not that i can recall no in and not in not in in any detail i couldn't i couldn't uh say no are you able to assist with
02:09:31 assist with what would need to be done in order for a definitive statement saying the boards will not contribute to the development stages of the fire um to be correct how would that be shown
02:09:45 um to be correct how would that be shown i i i'm afraid i'm not i'm not sure no do you have any idea what the scientific or evidential basis for that statement could have been
02:09:59 i don't i don't for sure know i'm i would imagine that it was based on some of the um testing and and um an assessment that was that was
02:10:14 and um an assessment that was that was in
02:10:14 in in in section seven um but well we'll be reading it now i think it confuses more than more than helps yes uh we'll come on to
02:10:26 more than helps yes uh we'll come on to section seven i think let me ask you this you were asked in your witness statement about your understanding at the time when you approved this certificate of the words
02:10:36 the words limited combustibility and uh if we we can take a look at if we need to but you were simply asked what you understood those words to mean in 2008 and your answer was
02:10:49 in 2008 and your answer was i recall it was related to a definition in approved document b actually perhaps we will look at it that's in your witness statement please at uh
02:10:59 at uh page nine so bba three zeros one one oh eight seven and it's a inquiry question 22
02:11:08 22 what was your own understanding of the meaning of the phrase limited combustibility and your answer is i recall it was related to a definition in approved document b can you go any further with that answer
02:11:22 can you go any further with that answer now
02:11:25 now yes i think i can i at the time when i did my
02:11:29 did my witness statement i um i i had not thought about k-15 for many years and it came a little bit out of the blue and i i was struggling to recall
02:11:40 i was struggling to recall detail um i think more obviously more recently having having had some of the other witnesses and being a little bit more steeped in in in the inquiry um
02:11:53 steeped in in in the inquiry um i you know i have had a look back at the proof document b from the from the time um and you know it is it is i think it is a a defined term within within approved
02:12:07 a a defined term within within approved document
02:12:07 document b um and i think it is defined in in one of the appendices but i i can't remember which appendacy which appendix it is yes fine do you
02:12:18 which appendix it is yes fine do you think you would have understood what the definition of limited combustibility was in 2008 whilst you were head of approvals
02:12:26 approvals i i believe so yes i mean i can't can't be absolutely certain what my you know depth of understanding was of of limited combustibility at the time
02:12:38 of limited combustibility at the time but i think i would have i would have known it and recognized it as a defined term yes and do you think at the time you had a good
02:12:50 do you think at the time you had a good or sound
02:12:50 or sound understanding of uh fire performance as dealt with in approved document b i don't um you know i wouldn't have
02:13:01 i don't um you know i wouldn't have claimed then or now to be any sort of expert on on fire performance um i would i would have looked at the relevant
02:13:13 i would have looked at the relevant parts of approved document b um at the time i would have some understanding of of the provisions there um
02:13:25 of the provisions there um they had an in-depth understanding no all right
02:13:28 all right what was your understanding in 2008 at the time you approved issue one of the certificate for k-15 what was your understanding of the combustibility or otherwise of
02:13:41 combustibility or otherwise of the k-15 product i think at the time i i would have understood that it was it's not a that it wasn't a non-combustible product
02:13:54 it wasn't a non-combustible product or or a product of limited combustibility right i think i would have i again i can't
02:14:02 can't it's so long ago i can't remember exactly what my thought would have been but i don't i don't think i would have thought of it in in that way no it's understandable it was some time ago
02:14:14 it's understandable it was some time ago just to be clear is your evidence that you did understand in 2008 that k15 was a combustible phenolic insulation material
02:14:24 material i i would have i believe so yes i know that you know combustibility is a there's a scale of you know you've got non-combustible at one end and then you've got
02:14:36 one end and then you've got not not if this isn't they're defined to very combustible at the other end so most products will lie somewhere somewhere within on that on that spectrum i think yes
02:14:47 on that on that spectrum i think yes understood your answer was i believe so yes so just to be absolutely clear you did understand that k15 was combustible i believe so yes
02:14:58 was combustible i believe so yes combustible in some in to some degree yes all right that being the case can you help me to understand how it could possibly be accurate to state
02:15:09 state in a bba certificate for that product the boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire i think i think at the time um
02:15:23 i think i think at the time um my understanding would have or my my my reading of that would would have been that the you know it
02:15:34 would have been that the you know it if it's it's not non-combustible but it wouldn't it wouldn't be one of the initial sources of the fight it wouldn't be
02:15:45 it wouldn't be something that burnt readily at the at the very start of the fire you know once a
02:15:52 once a fire is established it it it may then obviously be be part of that but development i think i think i probably read it as development was would be the very early stages but i can't be sure exactly how i
02:16:06 stages but i can't be sure exactly how i read that at the time no i'm not really asking you uh too much about how you read it at the time
02:16:12 time or perhaps we'll come back to that answer what i'm trying to understand from you
02:16:17 from you in very simple terms is this if you knew the product to be a combustible material
02:16:24 material how could it be how could it be accurate to state
02:16:27 to state in definitive terms without qualification or caveat the boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire it doesn't say as you've
02:16:40 it doesn't say as you've just been through it might not burn readily at the beginning of a fire or perhaps once a fire is established it might
02:16:47 might it says the boards will not contribute to the development stages of a fire how could that possibly be accurate in relation to a combustible product
02:16:58 relation to a combustible product i again i think it might depend you know i think i thought would have thought it would depend on the the degree of combustibility of
02:17:09 the degree of combustibility of of the product so i'm obviously i think in
02:17:13 in thinking at the time would have been that buildings contain a lot of different products many of which are combustible um some products will contribute
02:17:25 um some products will contribute more to the development of a fire than others
02:17:28 others um i think i took that to me that it wasn't
02:17:32 wasn't it wasn't some a product that was very combustible and would would contribute to the early stages of the fire i think in my mind development
02:17:43 the fire i think in my mind development probably meant early stages um perhaps rather than later stages but i i'm in saying that i'm i'm not you know not a fire expert and that
02:17:55 not you know not a fire expert and that may not be may not be correct no did you ever ask george lee what the source of or basis for that wording was do you appear
02:18:07 wording was do you appear and i may be wrong but i have the impression that you made a number of assumptions about what it might have meant did you ever simply go to the project manager who had written it and say what does this mean
02:18:20 and say what does this mean i may well have done i don't recall i don't recall a conversation um along those lines but i i
02:18:31 um along those lines but i i this is quite likely that i would have done yes
02:18:34 done yes um i can't i can't remember whether whether that did occur and what his answer was no fine if that did occur it must be the
02:18:46 no fine if that did occur it must be the case
02:18:46 case mustn't it mr hunt given that you later signed off that wording that he gave you some sort of satisfactory answer as to the source of or basis for that
02:18:57 as to the source of or basis for that wording
02:18:59 wording i i would believe so yes um do you have any idea now what that could be
02:19:06 be no i don't i'm sorry can you accept that in fact given that k-15 is neither non-combustible nor a material of limited combustibility
02:19:17 limited combustibility that that wording it is in fact misleading and inaccurate i thought i think it could potentially be read as misleading knowing what i know
02:19:30 read as misleading knowing what i know now um in what circumstances could it not be read as misleading or inaccurate
02:19:45 i think if it if it related to some of the content in in section seven um if it was something that could be taken from
02:19:57 taken from some of the uh the testing described there
02:20:00 there i see well we'll come on to section seven i'm sorry a few moments ago i did overspeak you and i apologize for that and you started to answer you said i think it potentially could be read as
02:20:12 think it potentially could be read as misleading knowing what i know now i'm a little confused by that answer because as i understood it you knew at the time that the product was combustible what do you know now that leads you to
02:20:25 what do you know now that leads you to say
02:20:25 say that could potentially be read as misleading oh okay i think
02:20:33 probably at the time i wouldn't have read any great significance into the into that into that statement why not i think i think again because and then
02:20:46 i think i think again because and then say rightly all wrongly i think in my mind it was it was i didn't think that that um k15 was a non-combustible product but i didn't think that it would
02:20:58 i didn't think that it would have a big contribution to the development of the of the fire maybe forgive me on what basis did you think at the time that it would
02:21:10 did you think at the time that it would not have a big contribution to the development of a fire
02:21:15 fire why do you say that i can't i can't remember
02:21:19 remember i can't remember what what what i my thoughts were exactly at the time um yeah
02:21:26 um yeah fair enough i think i must have ripped sorry i'm melting please go ahead i mean i i clearly would have
02:21:33 have read it at the time may have had a discussion with with george lee about it may have had other considerations but i can't
02:21:45 had other considerations but i can't remember why it was included in in those key facts success because it normally wouldn't
02:21:51 wouldn't normally wouldn't have a statement in there that then isn't repeated in in the section seven or just a
02:21:58 a great reference to section seven or in fact that can't be founded in any kind of scientific or evidential data yes right but i think you said earlier
02:22:11 yes right but i think you said earlier you you
02:22:12 you you didn't pick it up at the time or you didn't read anything particularly significant into that wording i don't think so no i can't
02:22:23 i don't think so no i can't remember i think if i had um you know we we just omitted it well do you think you ought to have done i think
02:22:34 i think looking back now with hindsight yes um it appears obviously his cause has caused confusion so i don't think i at the time realized that it would that
02:22:46 at the time realized that it would that it would cause um confusion but um it's it's clearly i think probably would be better
02:22:54 be better off without it in the certificate given what you have just said i think i do need to ask you this at this stage on what basis do you say in october 2008
02:23:06 on what basis do you say in october 2008 that you were competent to check statements about fire performance in bba certificates i don't i don't think i would be
02:23:18 i don't i don't think i would be competent to to you know to to check a fire related um comment in in in that particular way i i
02:23:30 comment in in in that particular way i i was probably i suppose you could say competent in in looking at bba certificates in in general
02:23:38 general um but i don't i don't i didn't have any competence in fire as such um and being able to read approve document
02:23:49 and being able to read approve document b
02:23:50 b and the various standards and and and have some knowledge in that way all right but
02:23:56 right but not enough um is this right to pick up that it might be ill-advised to state in the fire performance section of a
02:24:08 in the fire performance section of a certificate for a combustible product definitively that the product would not contribute to the development stages of a fire is it genuinely your evidence that that
02:24:19 is it genuinely your evidence that that did not strike you at the time as a significant or important statement i don't think it did not not in that front
02:24:30 front summary um i i think i think i would have perhaps attached more significance within section seven but i realize that's not you know
02:24:41 seven but i realize that's not you know that it does appear in the certificate and and therefore um you know forms forms part of the certificate but yeah i'm not sure that i i do follow on
02:24:53 yeah i'm not sure that i i do follow on that basis and in relation to the answer you've just given how could you possibly as head of approvals have any confidence that what was being said within the
02:25:04 that what was being said within the certificate about the fire performance or properties in fire of that product was correct and accurate you were the last line of sign off
02:25:15 you were the last line of sign off before the chief executive were you not uh yes yes so how could you have had confidence at the time that your own checks on the technical
02:25:27 that your own checks on the technical content
02:25:29 content of that certificate were good were accurate were adequate
02:25:35 i think at the time i i i clearly thought they they were um based on on you know reading this section seven and and
02:25:47 section seven and and knowing something about what was what was in
02:25:50 was in in a proof document b but um
02:25:55 i i can't really say anymore i don't think
02:25:59 think all right thank you mr han i'm going to ask you uh to stop there because mr chairman i note the time yes well now give me some help at this point how much longer do you think you may require with
02:26:11 longer do you think you may require with mr hunt
02:26:13 mr hunt i'm making fairly good progress and i hope she'll be more than about an hour and a half in the morning i'm afraid another hour and a half i'm afraid so possibly an hour right
02:26:25 i'm afraid so possibly an hour right well i think i'm being assisted i think an hour is more realistic i may be being over cautious well i think whether it's an hour or an hour and a half we're not going to carry on now with a view to finishing tonight
02:26:36 on now with a view to finishing tonight mr hunt uh i'm sorry about this because i think you were probably told that we had managed to get through your evidence today and that had been my hope but clearly
02:26:47 and that had been my hope but clearly we're not
02:26:47 we're not going to manage to do that even if we prolong the uh hearing a bit more than usual so i'm going to have to ask you i'm afraid to come back
02:26:56 come back uh tomorrow to continue your evidence i hope that's not going to be too inconvenient no that that's that's fine for me
02:27:04 for me so all right well that's very good in that case we'll we'll stop now and we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning please and again as before please don't discuss
02:27:17 and again as before please don't discuss your evidence or anything relating to it with anyone else overnight all right okay thank you thank you very much and we'll look forward to seeing you at 10 o'clock tomorrow morning
02:27:29 tomorrow morning thank you good thank you very much and that's where we'll close the proceedings for today we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow
02:27:53 you