Evidence from Alan White, senior contracts engineer at J S Wright & Co, the M&E subcontractor for Grenfell. Focus on smoke control system design, PSB's role as specialist subcontractor, and responsibility for ensuring regulatory compliance.
00:00:34 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing today we're going to hear evidence from mr alan white who was employed by j s wright at the time with
00:00:45 employed by j s wright at the time with which
00:00:46 which we are concerned that's right mr grange i think yes that's correct yes right mr white yes if mr white say would you ask him to come in please
00:01:01 good morning mr white good morning i understand you're going to make the affirmation that's correct uh well then can i ask you please to repeat the words on the screen
00:01:10 screen i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare
00:01:14 declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much now do sit down make yourself comfortable
00:01:27 down make yourself comfortable there's water there if you want it and we'll leave that to you yes from screen yes thank you yes can you please give the inquiry your full name
00:01:34 name mr ellen white thank you and thank you very much for coming today to assist the inquiry with its investigations it is very much appreciated thanks for being invited i will be asking you the questions today
00:01:46 asking you the questions today if you have any difficulty understanding anything i'm saying please just ask me to repeat the question or i'll put the point in a different way and if you can keep your voice up so that the transcriber who's sitting to your right can take a
00:01:58 who's sitting to your right can take a clear note that would be fantastic now you provided two witness statements for the inquiry if i can take you to the first statement on the screen this is jsw
00:02:13 there's that statement and if we go on to page
00:02:16 to page 34 we can see at the bottom it's dated the 26th of october 2018 and is that your signature it is and have you read that first statement recently
00:02:27 recently i have and can you confirm that the contents are true to the best of your knowledge and belief i can thank you and if we can pull up now your second statement at jsw407201
00:02:41 there's the second statement and if we go on to page six we can see it's dated the 21st of december
00:02:48 december 2020 again have you read that statement recently
00:02:52 recently i have and can you confirm that the contents are true i can thank you have you discussed the evidence you're going to give today with anyone before coming here this morning no thank you now i want to start by
00:03:04 no thank you now i want to start by asking you some questions about your background including your qualifications and experience if we look at paragraph eight of your first witness statement on page one here you set out
00:03:16 on page one here you set out uh some of your experience um and you tell us that from december 2015 you were a senior contract engineer at jsright and before that you
00:03:28 engineer at jsright and before that you were
00:03:29 were a contract engineer for them is that correct that's correct can you just explain what a contracts engineer does um i'd be the go-to person on site for a
00:03:40 um i'd be the go-to person on site for a client
00:03:40 client yes and i'd be looking at the package of works that we'd need to deliver i'd uh at the time i'd have a hand in procurement of
00:03:51 procurement of items of plant materials and also bringing on subcontractors especially some subcontractors yes thank you and how much of a difference was there between the role of a contract
00:04:02 was there between the role of a contract engineer and a senior contracts engineer um not a great deal of uh difference but um it's really a title that i was given to differentiate from other people that
00:04:15 differentiate from other people that were doing the role yes i probably had a little bit more responsibility because i was looking at uh more than one project simultaneously right i see yeah so you'd be expected to be managing
00:04:26 yeah so you'd be expected to be managing a number of projects at one time yes yes yes how much of your work prior to the grenfell tower project involved smoke control systems or dealing with specialist contractors working on smoke
00:04:38 specialist contractors working on smoke control systems um the projects i was on immediately before um a job in hawley for
00:04:51 the same principal contractor ryden's i had an involvement then yes and uh that
00:04:58 that would have been my first involvement with anything of the like i see so there was a smoke control system involved in that project yes there was
00:05:06 there was and was that a residential project yes it was and was it residential high rise uh
00:05:15 how that's categorized i'm not entirely sure
00:05:19 sure i mean at the time eight stories eight stories seven or eight stories um i don't believe it was categorized as high rise right thank you
00:05:30 high rise right thank you now at paragraph nine of your first statement we can still see it there on the page
00:05:34 the page you tell us that prior to joining js wright you were employed by dennis cox limited
00:05:39 limited as a mechanical supervisor and commissioning manager job role and then prior to that you were engaged by jdh mechanical services as a mechanical foreman is that correct that's correct
00:05:51 foreman is that correct that's correct and how similar was was the work you did for those companies to the work you did at js wright um moving
00:06:01 there was differences um when i was working well if you go back a little bit further from this you know i would come from being like a plumber's mate
00:06:12 plumber's mate yes to working as a plumber up to performance looking after just plumbing and hating works yes and then as i gained more experience there's
00:06:25 as i gained more experience there's certain roles where i was assisting with other trades things like firm legislation firms that were lagging pipe work zone and so forth building management system companies yes
00:06:38 building management system companies yes helping out with that ventilation standard duct work yes and so and so forces gaining experience there
00:06:44 there moving into onto dennis cox um that was sort of a freelance position i wasn't directly employed by dennis cox um a little bit
00:06:56 by dennis cox um a little bit more responsibility when it moved into the commissioning phase of it yes organising and yeah moving into js right um it was just
00:07:08 js right um it was just a progression from that a little bit more involvement with other bits rather than my area of expertise
00:07:15 expertise yes and did any of your work for those two earlier firms involved um working on smoke control systems no not at all no so it was only when you got to just
00:07:26 no so it was only when you got to just right that you first encountered that and do you think that other than the ryden project you talked about the one previously the whole leigh project did you say hawley uh yeah um
00:07:39 uh yeah um sorry yeah gatwick airport yes other than that project do you think you've been involved in any other smoke control projects with js wright no no yeah
00:07:52 and um you're now self-employed is that correct
00:07:57 correct yes yes so you don't when did you stop working for js wright um i believe
00:08:06 september 2020 right actually yes now at paragraph 10 you then
00:08:13 then explain that um you had attended a number of training courses whilst at jsright
00:08:18 jsright now is it fair to say that those courses were predominantly about project management or site management or related health and safety uh courses that's correct there's a some
00:08:30 uh courses that's correct there's a some courses there to aid my site experience and um help me if you look at the effective communications human relations is man management yes
00:08:41 human relations is man management yes thank you and did you have any other formal qualifications relevant to the work you were doing at jsri did not no now a paragraph 12 of your first statement over on page two
00:08:55 first statement over on page two you tell us that this is your role on the grenfell tower project that in brief your role was to facilitate the delivery of mechanical and electrical elements with the js wright contract
00:09:07 with the js wright contract and you were responsible for the overall administration control programming and progress of the contract is that correct that's correct and just to be clear that was the subcontract which
00:09:18 was the subcontract which js wright had with ryden yes yes yeah and js wright was employed by ryden to be the mechanical and electrical subcontractor for the work at grenfell tower yes that's great
00:09:32 and was your role at grenfell tower typical of the kind of role you had as contracts engineer on other projects yes yes now your colleague at js wright
00:09:43 yes yes now your colleague at js wright david peacock says in his witness statement that he took over from you in late 2014 as project manager is that correct that's correct now in common parlance could your role be
00:09:54 in common parlance could your role be described
00:09:55 described as the js right project manager for the grenfell tower refurbishment
00:10:03 it's hard to differentiate between um the role of contracts manager sorry uh contracts engineer to project manager right
00:10:14 manager right there is they have a separate project manager
00:10:18 manager at the time no but we did have um associate directors who kind of oversee the um obviously the works
00:10:28 works who i would report to yes yeah along with design teams for assistance and reference to certain things yes thank you that's helpful
00:10:40 and at paragraph 13 of your statement you say that richard moss and j s wright specialist subcontractor managers reported to you is that correct uh that's
00:10:51 is that correct uh that's correct i wouldn't say i suppose you could take that in different ways i was the person people would go to for assistance where they wouldn't had a full-time
00:11:03 where they wouldn't had a full-time present on site people would be asking me
00:11:05 me informing me what they needed done to enable their next visit to carry out works yes the sort of role that i feel yes now if we look at paragraph 20 of
00:11:17 yes now if we look at paragraph 20 of your first statement now on page three
00:11:22 here you tell us that it it isn't was at the time of this project usual for js wright to engage the services of other specialist sub-sub-contractors referred to as
00:11:33 sub-sub-contractors referred to as specialist subcontractors in your statement yes yes
00:11:40 um so um and is it right that for m e matters j s wright was in effect the middleman between ryden and the various more specialist m e
00:11:51 and the various more specialist m e subcontractors i would say that describes it well yeah and in terms of the smoke control system at grenfell tower sometimes called the
00:12:02 at grenfell tower sometimes called the aov
00:12:03 aov automatic opening vent system the specialist subcontractor was psb for the design element is that correct that's correct and they also commissioned the system didn't they yes but another company
00:12:16 didn't they yes but another company installed it didn't they uh there was the different elements of the system as a whole were installed by
00:12:23 by different specialist subcontractors yes i see
00:12:27 i see now look looking at paragraph 14 of your statement on page two
00:12:34 you tell us that psb was one of the uh sub specialist subcontractors that you had regular contact with during your work on the refurbishment project is that correct
00:12:46 refurbishment project is that correct yes to what extent did psb consult you or update you in relation to their work in particular in relation to design decisions that were being made
00:12:57 decisions that were being made over the smoke control system in relation to design matters i would say
00:13:04 consulting me not at all um towards the tail end um the only sort of input i might have had in a decision to change
00:13:16 decision to change the way the natural ventilation element of the sort of environmental element of the system was controlled um
00:13:29 system was controlled um then i would have played some part there i see yeah yes thank you and you were also in regular contact with simon o'connor and david hughes at ryden is that correct
00:13:41 hughes at ryden is that correct yes yes yeah did js wright themselves have
00:13:45 have any in-house expertise on smoke control systems
00:13:49 systems no
00:13:53 and did you have anybody at ryden that you could go to to talk about specialist matters to do with smoke control was did you have anybody other than the specialist subcontractor who you
00:14:05 the specialist subcontractor who you could turn to for advice over matters to do with the smoke control system
00:14:14 my involvement with psb or their package of works would be there to facilitate what they needed to do yes so to go to someone to discuss
00:14:28 so to go to someone to discuss technicalities of way the system worked so and so forth wouldn't be really a matter for me to discuss yes whereas you know the physical constraints and the build progress to
00:14:40 constraints and the build progress to now
00:14:40 now allow components of the system to be installed was where i would be getting involved i see yes thank you
00:14:48 thank you now in terms of your own knowledge of relevant standards and guidance relevant to smoke control systems um were you aware of the approved documents
00:14:58 documents that gave practical guidance on the building regulations definitely was aware at the time of building regulations yes and the documents that were provided to assist people in understanding it yes
00:15:10 assist people in understanding it yes and at the time of the project had you read relevant parts of say approved document b on fire safety i wouldn't have done that no and would you know what the
00:15:21 no and would you know what the different functional requirements were of the building regulations that overall might be relevant to the work that js wright was carrying out
00:15:33 um sorry do you mind repeating that question yes would you know what the different functional requirements were of the building regulations that overall might be relevant to the work that js wright was carrying out
00:15:46 work that js wright was carrying out um it's difficult to say um let me give you an example so for fire safety matters for example there is um functional requirement b1
00:15:57 there is um functional requirement b1 which is about facilitating means of escape
00:16:00 escape for those within the building and adequate facilities for means of escape would something like that have meant anything to you at the time it would have
00:16:08 have meant something to me but in a broad spectrum i would have known that you know there was various things in uh the building would be parts of the building fabric or
00:16:19 would be parts of the building fabric or mechanical systems yes that were there to design um egress yes in a fire and obviously um fire fighters coming into the
00:16:30 um fire fighters coming into the building
00:16:31 building yes what about ever reading any more specific pieces of guidance like british standards so for example we'll come on to it in psb's design documentation it refers to a particular british standard
00:16:43 particular british standard that one of their performance criteria was taken from would you ever if that cropped up during a project would you ever go and look at that british standard yourself there's that at
00:16:56 there's that at that specific time there are only two bits of
00:17:00 bits of information that i definitely had a look at
00:17:04 at and one was relating to dry risers pressure testing of existing dry risers yes and
00:17:11 yes and at the time of demonstration to building control
00:17:15 control um i had a good look through the smoke controls association's guide yes um but other than that i can't recall specifically looking at any area
00:17:27 recall specifically looking at any area of
00:17:29 of building regulations or advisory documents yes or other british standards no no fine thank you
00:17:35 thank you yes so my next question was about that smoke control association guidance so i think i think you said that at the time that the system was being commissioned and demonstrated is that right you had you said you had a good
00:17:46 right you had you said you had a good look at that guidance yes um you probably can't remember but would that have been the 2015 version 2 of that guidance do you remember it was the 2015 version
00:17:57 remember it was the 2015 version yes great in particular section 9. yes thank you that's helpful and that's the section about what different types of tests you should carry out on different types of systems when
00:18:08 on different types of systems when testing and commissioning yes that's correct
00:18:09 correct thank you now if we go to psb 50214
00:18:21 which i think this is the same point yes this is this is the final version of psb's
00:18:26 psb's technical submission we can see it's version six it's dated the 15th of march 2016 and if we go over to page three
00:18:40 just to make good the point i was mentioning under smoke control system 1.1.2 at the bottom that's where we see there's a code of practice for um the specification for pressure differential systems
00:18:53 differential systems bsen12101 part 6. um so you didn't come to look at any part of that guidance during the grenfell project not the outcome recall
00:19:07 now in terms of a timeline of your involvement is it right that from october 2014 to march 2015 you tell us you were on site at grenfell tower for about three days a week
00:19:19 tower for about three days a week that's correct that's correct and then you left the project in march 2015 and you returned to it in december 2015 from which point you spent about half your working week on site at grenfell
00:19:30 your working week on site at grenfell tower
00:19:31 tower is that correct and um if we look at paragraphs 15 and 16 of your first statement on page two
00:19:42 here you explain that jf's rights involvement in the project really began in july 2014 is that correct
00:19:54 i believe that's correct i wasn't involved until later on in that year yeah um but as far as tendering processes and discussions with ryden's work and so and i believe that's around about the quick day yes and when did your work you said you
00:20:07 yes and when did your work you said you weren't really involved until later in 2014 when did your work really begin in earnest
00:20:12 earnest uh in relation to the m e works so that would have been directly after our internal meeting which i believe
00:20:21 believe the exact date is right in front of me 14th
00:20:25 14th of august 2014. yes so after the pre-contract meeting yes yes
00:20:34 yes yes um and was it your understanding that prior to j.s wright's formal involvement js wright had been in discussions with ryden
00:20:42 ryden about what the project involved and the extent to which ryden had already appointed their own specialist subcontractors were you made aware of that
00:20:53 as far as their own specialist subcontractors i wouldn't i don't think i'd be able to answer that one and say i would have been aware of ryden's specialist subcontractors
00:21:04 of ryden's specialist subcontractors until we started to get involved on site and meet these people sit in meetings and have discussions but at that point um they're no yeah so i wouldn't i
00:21:15 um they're no yeah so i wouldn't i personally wouldn't have been aware of who they were yes i see if we just look at a document on this jsw404140
00:21:29 this is a list dated january 2014. so i appreciate prior to your involvement of um it's a list of queries raised by potential contractors about the work
00:21:40 potential contractors about the work required at grenfell tower and on page four
00:21:45 four at number one um there's the question have you been in contact with any specialist companies regarding the smoke extraction system and it says yes we've been in con in contact with action air regarding the specification
00:21:57 action air regarding the specification of the dampness which is reflected within the mechanical schedule however the contractors must make their own arrangements regarding the specialist advice available do you see that i do do you um did you
00:22:09 do you see that i do do you um did you ever have
00:22:09 ever have any contact with action air not to my recollection though yeah and you tell us paragraph 44 of your first statement i don't think we need to turn
00:22:20 statement i don't think we need to turn it up that psb was already engaged on the project before js wright's involvement unlike many other specialist subcontractors is that right yes that is that is correct yes yeah
00:22:36 and it's right isn't it that j s wright then formalized psb's engagement as a js right subcontractor yes that's correct
00:22:46 now if we go to psb 50111
00:22:56 this is a js wright document it's dated we can see in the top right hand corner the 19th of may 2015 and it is
00:23:07 2015 and it is headed sub-sub-contractor particular conditions and if you look under um well i think it was meant to say description of works there's a large i
00:23:18 description of works there's a large i think this document's slightly corrupted there's a large eye and then it should read description of works it's an underlined heading kind of just beyond halfway down that page
00:23:29 that page description of works to be carried out including any drawing numbers and specification references and then it's got full design and drawings for the aov system do you see that there i do
00:23:41 system do you see that there i do and is that is it and we can see that psb so i should have mentioned at the top
00:23:45 top is the sub subcontractor yes we can see psb
00:23:49 psb there and is it right that this constitutes the written agreement between just wright and psb yes
00:24:02 and just to be clear you considered psb to be the designer of the refurbished smoke control system did you i did yes yes what if any due diligence
00:24:16 i did yes yes what if any due diligence um did js write or do your knowledge ryden do
00:24:19 ryden do about employing psb as the specialist subcontractor for the smoke control works
00:24:30 um it's quite difficult question to answer but to my understanding there was a specialist company there that had some involvement yes and had given
00:24:43 yes and had given advice um
00:24:47 advice um to the team pre-construction um and as they had a background of um
00:24:58 what was going on on site and were familiar with it um i think the decision was made within js wright that they were the best people to take the project forward yes but do you know whether um js wright
00:25:12 yes but do you know whether um js wright had a look at psb asked any questions of them about their experience their expertise
00:25:17 expertise too before making that decision to my knowledge
00:25:21 knowledge um
00:25:24 psb had worked with js white a number of years earlier so i think there was some
00:25:32 some whether it was same personnel or so on and so forth but there may have been in the role i was in at the time there may have been some things that go on in the background that are we're not aware of
00:25:45 that are we're not aware of um checks into especially some contractors i know if we a new subcontractor later on in
00:25:56 a new subcontractor later on in jsy if a new subcontractor was being brought onto our books as such um there would be our aftercare department various other checks yes physically going to look at their work
00:26:08 going to look at their work yeah so on and so forth would occur yeah it might be that had happened previously um but you're not aware that you're not aware of any such process in this instance in this instance on i was not aware of it no yeah
00:26:21 on i was not aware of it no yeah and and you said that where where they were taking on someone that was new to their books there'd be some kind of um checking process before they were engaged
00:26:31 engaged um but was it typical for js wright that where you'd got a subcontractor like this who'd had some involvement already was it typical that you would just inherit that subcontractor and then
00:26:42 just inherit that subcontractor and then work
00:26:42 work going forward with them without any further checks uh i don't think i'm the best person to confirm that or uh refute it to be honest
00:26:53 honest um at the time this i hadn't heard of we think at this time when this project started i've been with jazz white for about a year yes um all the
00:27:07 yes um all the subcontractors that i'd used on the previous
00:27:10 previous uh jobs were ones that jsoi had used previously so i wasn't subject to seeing what the checking process was for a new subcontractor right yeah
00:27:23 for a new subcontractor right yeah so it would be difficult for me to give you information on that accurately yeah just to be absolutely clear you didn't have any previous experience of working with psp
00:27:32 with psp and were you ever aware at any stage in the project of any concerns being expressed about psb and its work
00:27:42 no no and um were you ever aware of um there being any discussion within psb itself for example between a man
00:27:55 psb itself for example between a man called fergus mcgregor and mr marnie hugh marley were you ever aware of any discussions within psb about what the right design solution was for grenfell tower
00:28:07 for grenfell tower and whether there was any perhaps differences within psb about what the right design solution was i i don't cool being aware of that specific scenario during the course
00:28:19 that specific scenario during the course of
00:28:20 of the build fine
00:28:24 and um in paragraph 68 of your first statement on page 11 if we just pull that up
00:28:33 you say um in the second sentence end of the first line i understand that psp had been involved in the very early stages of the refurbishment project and had been working with max fordham in
00:28:44 and had been working with max fordham in relation to the design now can you help us what was your understanding when you began working with
00:28:51 with psb and working on the smoke control system
00:28:54 system what was your understanding of what the design of the smoke control system was at that stage in basic terms
00:29:02 from very early on first time going to site i do remember sitting in a design tank meeting where smoke control was discussed
00:29:17 my understanding was it was there was a system there
00:29:24 whether it worked or didn't work his uh what elements of it worked um i don't think was ever confirmed but my understanding was
00:29:36 understanding was there was a team of experienced specialists from psb building controls involved and
00:29:47 involved and consultants from max foldham that were looking at seeing what they could do to improve what was already there yes um so
00:29:59 yes um so yeah were you aware um when you started working on the project or made aware subsequently that the max the original max fordham proposal
00:30:10 proposal had been a different proposal from the one that psb then began developing this it's quite difficult to take myself back to times obviously i've been looking um
00:30:21 been looking um and following proceedings um and there's been a lot of information of late obviously about smoke control it's hard
00:30:28 it's hard for me to recollect at the time what my understanding was yes i know i've got a good understanding of
00:30:34 of various parties faults at the time from what's been said over the past few weeks yes i understand i i couldn't tell you thank you we don't
00:30:45 i i couldn't tell you thank you we don't want you to speculate and i appreciate it's difficult to disengage those things um now in terms of the existing system you say that on your initial visits to grenfell tower the existing system was
00:30:57 grenfell tower the existing system was not operational um that you say that paragraph 66 of your first statement on page 11 can you help us exactly when was that that you were going to the tower for your initial visits and you you were
00:31:09 for your initial visits and you you were aware that the existing system was not working
00:31:12 working now i my first visit to site um
00:31:21 walking around the building it was quite obvious there were certain things that were looking a bit shabby
00:31:30 in specific specific reference to the smoke control system i've noticed that while demolition was underway in certain areas there was a fan
00:31:41 in certain areas there was a fan on the floor disconnected um that would lead me to believe that the system wasn't working yeah as intended can you remember
00:31:52 yeah as intended can you remember whether that was um at the bottom of the tower or at the top at the very top um at the bottom right yeah okay um and did you know or were you ever
00:32:03 um and did you know or were you ever told
00:32:04 told um in very basic terms how the original system had been designed to work
00:32:11 i've been thinking about this one what i know now and what i knew then was um
00:32:19 two different things but i do clearly remember
00:32:23 remember seeing a switch that referred to boost function right something along them lines yeah yeah yeah um
00:32:34 yeah yeah um so if you'd been asked at the time did you know
00:32:38 you know that this is a natural ventilation system but it's got an override boost at the fire brigade could you do think that was my understanding yeah at the time yeah thank you
00:32:50 and do you consider that js wright was in a position to provide meaningful supervision and scrutiny of psb's design and commissioning work on the smoke control system no
00:33:03 on the smoke control system no no i don't and can you expand on why you say that
00:33:07 say that um to
00:33:10 um to screw and i as a specialist subcontractor i think we'd have to have the in-house capability to be that specialist subcontractor um and what we've done um is engaged
00:33:24 and what we've done um is engaged especially subcontractor to to do the works um
00:33:29 works um we would be reliant as js right on approval processes you know being the middleman
00:33:35 middleman information from psb to js right onto the likes of max fordham building control
00:33:42 control looking at what the proposals were what the system designs were and getting the feedback information flow to say yes that's what we need to install yes
00:33:53 yes that's what we need to install yes um that's what psp would need to supply and
00:33:56 and install by other other specialists i should say um but in our capabilities for scrutiny quality control to the level of detail we wouldn't have
00:34:09 to the level of detail we wouldn't have the capabilities of doing that yeah and at the time were you satisfied that those approval processes you talked about
00:34:16 about and you mentioned max fordham and building control were you satisfied that those were going to be sufficient to pick up any problems with the design any defects in the design at the time most definitely
00:34:28 the design at the time most definitely that's how you at the time yeah yeah so you were confident that if there were any
00:34:32 any problems with the design or any problems with the commissioning process that would be picked up by those other people
00:34:39 people absolutely yeah
00:34:44 and i think you tell us at paragraph 70 we can see it there on the screen on page 11 of your statement js write engaged psp as they were the experts in smoke control systems and js
00:34:56 experts in smoke control systems and js wright relied on their experience and expertise
00:34:59 expertise js wright acted as a conduit for information passing between ryden as main contractor and psb as specialist subcontractor so does it follow from all of that that js
00:35:10 does it follow from all of that that js wright didn't ever themselves consider whether the designs from psb for the control system for the smoke control system were appropriate
00:35:23 from my role
00:35:27 on site when an approved technical submittal
00:35:33 submittal especially subcontractor is on site i'll be there to facilitate that package works get an understanding of what works they need to do in what order and
00:35:44 and especially for ones that are not on site full time um be their go-to be their reference on site to inform them when they need to be in to do certain things as far as
00:35:56 things as far as looking at that information that's given to me
00:36:00 to me to deliver the job um that process happens before it comes to me
00:36:08 to me if you could see where i'm coming from now um
00:36:12 now um jazz rights design team we've got some very experienced guys none of them um at the time especially in this field but there are guys there that would have
00:36:23 but there are guys there that would have an understanding of building rigs i'm sure there would have been some discussions if anything was seen to be
00:36:33 obviously yes [Music]
00:36:37 [Music] not correct yes thank you that's helpful and when you came on the project and and became engaged with it what exactly did you understand the role
00:36:48 what exactly did you understand the role of max fordham to be at that point um consultant to the
00:36:59 m e on the mechanical electrical on the on the project um someone who'd designed a performance specification yes and quite
00:37:12 performance specification yes and quite quite detailed um and someone who would be checking
00:37:23 who would be checking our drawings our technical submittals and
00:37:26 and giving approval
00:37:30 so you did understand that they would be checking the submissions and giving their approval yes on behalf of a client
00:37:39 client yes that was my understanding and who was that client um to my understanding their client was um the kensington chelsea yes chelsea yes tenant management
00:37:53 yes chelsea yes tenant management did you ever become aware that the performance you call it the performance specification um i think technically it was probably the employer's requirements that were drafted by max fordham did you ever
00:38:04 drafted by max fordham did you ever become aware that those employers requirements set out a different system from the system that psb then developed as their design
00:38:18 then developed as their design it's where in the timeline i've become aware of that yes probably not from day one but over the course of the project that would have been the case yes um
00:38:28 yes um after i've been through from the first engagement there um i would have gone through all the max folding
00:38:35 folding documentation and then that would have been i think there was a sort of a proposed system schematic within that
00:38:44 which i would have been aware of yeah yes and do you remember realizing that that system schematic and the documentation that had been prepared by max fordham was based on a
00:38:56 prepared by max fordham was based on a different design of system something called a push-pull system where air was being um sucked into the lobby and
00:39:04 lobby and extracted out i do understand that there was
00:39:08 was a set of principles that were being applied to the initial ideas and that did change with psb's involvement yes and what in basic terms what did you
00:39:20 and what in basic terms what did you understand that changed too um
00:39:25 too um my understanding was that because of the physical constraints of the existing building fabric we psb
00:39:36 we psb had a idea of maximizing air movement by using both of the existing shafts to move
00:39:48 both of the existing shafts to move air out of the building yes um that's the fundamental of how i understand the system to work yes and the fundamental change between the two yes and did you understand that the
00:39:59 and did you understand that the consequence of that the consequence of that
00:40:02 that dual extraction would be to depressurize the lobby when compared say with the stare did you understand that at the time i would have understood that if you've got
00:40:13 would have understood that if you've got a fan positioned in a shaft with a opening an opening into an area that would move air out of that yeah yeah so um but difference in pressure
00:40:24 pressure in the duct to the lobby caused by the fan
00:40:27 fan and uh how come on that would have been movement of air yeah and what did you understand the overall objective of that to be um to mines i think we mentioned it earlier is
00:40:38 earlier is to aid uh escape of persons and aid
00:40:44 and aid [Music]
00:40:46 [Music] firefighters to get into the building right
00:40:49 right yeah now at paragraph 52 of your first statement on page seven just go to that
00:40:58 we've touched on building control already but you tell us i had personal dealings with the council's building control people mainly paul hanson and john hoban in relation to the automatic smoke ventilation system
00:41:10 ventilation system from my involvement with them i formed the clear view that paul hanson was very knowledgeable about smoke ventilation systems and can you just expand on that what led you to form that view about
00:41:21 to form that view about paul hansen um it would have been sitting in a dtm which you know from my experience of
00:41:32 from my experience of building control people the esses whatever reference we call this type of person they would be someone that would on site anyway be coming down to check
00:41:43 on site anyway be coming down to check things
00:41:45 things i remember sitting in design team meetings
00:41:48 meetings this is present from the contract side of the js right um thinking this guy's getting involved you know and talking very knowledgeably
00:42:00 you know and talking very knowledgeably about the subject yes um with a good understanding of the existing building and um that's at the time and um towards the end of the the
00:42:12 um towards the end of the the project when i was looking at the smoke control association's guide i discovered pretty much why that was because the document i was reading his name appeared on it yes yeah to be
00:42:24 his name appeared on it yes yeah to be honest at the time that filled me with some confidence yes and i'm gonna come back to some specific um to ask you about a particular specific meeting that building control were in attendance in due course in general terms how often were you in
00:42:36 in general terms how often were you in contact with paul hanson during the lifetime of the project um it's quite unusual in uh my position then and since to be in direct control with building control yes direct contact with
00:42:49 building control yes direct contact with building control um i think there was very few
00:42:56 very few [Music]
00:42:57 [Music] times when i had direct contact with him um and i think that would have been around the tail end of the project when was looking at demonstrations
00:43:10 yes and and in paragraph 54 of your um statement just below where we were reading from before you said building control remain remained actively involved in the
00:43:22 remained actively involved in the project
00:43:23 project usually contact with building control is by the client but on this project i did liaise with them directly in may 2016 when arranging for their attendance at a demonstration of the smoke control system yes correct yes thank you um
00:43:38 correct yes thank you um now if we could go to jsw403472
00:43:50 and at the top is an email sent to you on the 28th of october 2014 and it's from david bradbury
00:44:01 and it's from david bradbury who's the senior design engineer at jsright is that right yes yes and in the first line of the email he says um he says al as discussed i'm meeting hugh from psb on monday to review their
00:44:13 from psb on monday to review their solution for the aov system at grenfell i'll let you know what's said and i'll try and get them down to meet yourself perhaps coincide it with a dtm now you mentioned dtm is that design team meeting that's correct yes thank you
00:44:28 and is it right that by this time i october 2014 js wright had taken over responsibility for the design of the knee smoke control system
00:44:40 in my opinion that's not correct we've been awarded a package of works which included um the smoke control system
00:44:53 um the smoke control system but the responsibility was offset by uh engaging the specialists in the field namely psp right i see so you didn't yourself consider that you were
00:45:04 consider that you were responsible for making sure that design was delivered properly
00:45:15 so we'll answer the question correctly so
00:45:22 the responsibility for the design in my opinion sat with psb um jazz wright would be there to facilitate that through flow of
00:45:33 there to facilitate that through flow of information and
00:45:35 and [Music]
00:45:38 [Music] and assisting where they could within their area of expertise yes but um
00:45:44 um anything i've done that i wouldn't know yes
00:45:47 yes mr cross smith in his witness statement for the transcript this is a paragraph 48 of his main statement for the inquiry he he described it like this he said
00:45:58 he he described it like this he said the design of the smoke ventilation system was now in the hands of j.s wright who were taking the lead with building control now would you agree with that summary no
00:46:09 now would you agree with that summary no i wouldn't
00:46:12 and it's basically for the reason you just explained you don't agree yeah it's just my understanding and it always has been and it still remains that on
00:46:20 that on um these particular contracts that um our intent of what we want to do is always signed off in
00:46:31 want to do is always signed off in advance of us starting works on it before procurement begins so on and so forth and definitely before installation begins and there's a process there and it goes
00:46:42 and there's a process there and it goes to
00:46:42 to a consultant um assuming that
00:46:50 approval from building control where necessary
00:46:53 necessary would be managed and sold by the consultant and when you take that approval from building control where necessary would be managed and sought by the consultant
00:47:04 be managed and sought by the consultant do you be managed and sought by max fordham in this instance yes that would be my understanding of how china command and things worked now if we go to max404511
00:47:24 we go to max404511 this is an email from
00:47:28 david bradbury
00:47:31 j.s wright um to john hoban rbkc building control with you and some others copied in including others from ryden
00:47:42 including others from ryden and in the second paragraph um david bradbury says um hi john i need to talk to you about the proposed smoke vent system at grenfell tower
00:47:53 smoke vent system at grenfell tower if we can meet on site next wednesday that will be ideal alternative that if that's not convenient please let me know and we can hopefully arrange an alternative time or i could come to your offices
00:48:03 offices and this is an email that mr cross smith cites in
00:48:06 cites in in support of his assertion that it was now
00:48:09 now js wright who were taking the lead with building control in practice um um do you agree that that's what we're seeing in this in this email here i think all we can
00:48:21 in this email here i think all we can see
00:48:22 see there is um david brubbery just right um asking for discussion with building control
00:48:40 normal procedure for building control engagement would be via our client or a consultant um
00:48:51 or a consultant um the likelihood of what's occurred here is uh
00:48:55 is uh we've been asked by our client to speak directly with building control been given the okay to do that rather than it being our
00:49:06 than it being our responsibility to do so that would have been my understanding at the time i see yes okay thank you now if we could look at a document this is jsw403474
00:49:25 these are the first set of proposals from psb
00:49:30 from psb in relation to something they're calling there you can see in the title smoke ventilation technical proposal stair
00:49:36 stair depressurization systems and it was issued for comment by hugh marney on the 22nd of april 2014 so it's an earlier document from 2014
00:49:50 so it's an earlier document from 2014 and if we go to page two just to so you can see a bit more of the document it says that in the introduction first paragraph having identified possible problems with the proposed push pull
00:50:01 problems with the proposed push pull system
00:50:02 system leading to excessive pressure drop due to the high induct velocity within the existing builder's work shafts an alternative smoke control design solution is required after discussions this report provides
00:50:13 after discussions this report provides an alternative approach to designing a lobby control system these proposals have to be firmed up and submitted to building control of authority for discussion and then in the fourth paragraph the proposal is to
00:50:25 fourth paragraph the proposal is to design a depressurization system which will protect the stairwell by providing an airflow from the stairwell into the lobby when the stairwell lobby door is open now
00:50:35 now do you ever remember reading this proposal or being sent this proposal
00:50:41 proposal when you were working with psb on the smoke control system i would have read this yeah we would um this
00:50:52 this information we would have had on file in on
00:50:56 on json server yes so i would have had a look just obviously would be completely factual um we had a number of versions of this on
00:51:07 we had a number of versions of this on our system right i believe it was a complete list of
00:51:12 of various revisions yes so i think
00:51:17 this part of text might have been copy and pasted on various documents so as it went along i'm not sure yeah so this was a stand-alone document that set out principle the system and
00:51:29 that set out principle the system and then what happened was there was a technical submission that was developed from revision naught through to revision six which kept changing piecemeal so do you think that what you saw was
00:51:41 think that what you saw was perhaps the technical submission um i'm looking at this i can see the psp logo it's a a layout text type which is familiar yes um i'm drawn straight toward jason thought
00:51:53 i'm drawn straight toward jason thought it
00:51:54 it was looking at this one of the um revisions of the technical smell so if that is not that there's possibility i've read it but i may not have yes i understand
00:52:05 but i may not have yes i understand sorry apologies for confusion no no no that's fine um and did you ever think about the extent to which this system was attempting to comply with
00:52:17 system was attempting to comply with that british standard that's cited there in the fifth paragraph was that something that ever um was given any consideration by you or anyone else at js right as far as you
00:52:28 or anyone else at js right as far as you were concerned um
00:52:33 um speaking from
00:52:38 uh you know my involvement and what i was there to do um my opinion and faults and they would have been at the time that all of this design
00:52:52 all of this design approval process
00:52:56 having said that um would have been done front end before we start actually installing on site i know there was some development after the install
00:53:07 the install started yes um
00:53:11 but consideration two specific british standards my consideration was more to
00:53:22 my consideration was more to facilitating and towards the end of it um
00:53:27 um checking and witnessing say checking maybe looking that the system
00:53:34 system actually done what i was told by documentation it should be doing yes
00:53:40 yes yes i understand do you ever recall there being any discussion with anyone about
00:53:46 about what the potential disadvantages of this system this depressurization system as it's described here might be at grenfell tower do you ever remember there being any discussion about disadvantages um
00:53:59 discussion about disadvantages um proposal
00:53:59 proposal i no use the answer to that
00:54:06 now um it is oral evidence to the inquiry mr marnie said that he had told max fordham that it was absolutely impossible to install a compliance system at grenfell i
00:54:17 grenfell i compliant with current standards or particular guidance because of a number of constraints in the tower including the size of the shafts the layout of the corridors etc
00:54:29 corridors etc did you ever have a similar discussion with mr mani about it being impossible to install a compliant system and therefore just having to do the best with
00:54:40 having to do the best with what was left in the tower i definitely had
00:54:43 had an understanding on my second engagement that everything that was possible to increase air movement had been done
00:54:57 to increase air movement had been done and uh definitely confident in the people that was doing it
00:55:03 and the guys that were actually installing the kit right yeah mr marley explained that his proposals were
00:55:10 were an alternative design solution that met the spirit of the requirements because he couldn't meet the requirements again do you ever remember something similar being said to you at the time
00:55:22 being said to you at the time at the time no
00:55:27 and um he also referred to the fact that he understood that they were going forward on what he called a betterment by bettering the airflow of the old system
00:55:38 system and he kept referring to it as a betterment do you remember that term ever being used during the project well surely specific term betterment at the time but i was at the time i was definitely
00:55:52 i was at the time i was definitely very conscious that all that could be done was being done in my opinion to maximize air movement as i said earlier yes
00:56:04 as i said earlier yes were you conscious during the project that one of the things that building control wanted was some form of analysis that showed um how the system was an improvement on the existing system did
00:56:15 improvement on the existing system did you become aware of that
00:56:21 it's very difficult to take myself back in time and i think i may be confusing different projects um
00:56:32 i would have been aware of um certain models that could have been done from previous projects um from what i can recall at the time
00:56:44 um from what i can recall at the time this might be me getting myself a little bit mixed up our particular models to prove certain things on the project might not
00:56:55 certain things on the project might not have been
00:56:55 have been effective or because because it was an existing
00:57:00 existing fabric existing building existing fabric
00:57:07 there would be a lot of unknowns right
00:57:12 so you know there's over the past few days i've heard mention of cfd models and so on and so yes that was my next question do you ever remember there being any discussion at any time with any party about whether it might be sensible to do
00:57:25 about whether it might be sensible to do some kind of computational fluid dynamics analysis of the system from my recollection there was discussion um
00:57:37 there was discussion um we are going back a long way but what sits in my memory is that it would be very difficult to do that because it was an existing building
00:57:51 because it was an existing building with certain unknowns right and can you remember who it was that was saying it would be very difficult to do that i don't i'm sorry okay fine now if let's just show you the first version of the technical submission
00:58:03 version of the technical submission this is psb50207
00:58:10 i showed you earlier the final version of it but this is the first version it was
00:58:14 was revision naught it was issued for approval by mr mani on the 12th of november 2014. so by this time were you
00:58:23 you involved in the smoke control aspects of the project
00:58:28 i would have been on site by that time yeah involved in the smoke control expects at that time i don't think he was in a position to get the ball rolling
00:58:39 get the ball rolling at that time right is it correct that this was issued for j.s wright who were by now receiving psb's technical proposals
00:58:50 psb's technical proposals i would say that's the case we've been appointed by ryden's and fulfilling that role was yes middle man
00:58:56 man conduit for information from a specialist back to our client for um review approval yes yes and if we go on to page three of
00:59:07 yes and if we go on to page three of this submission um
00:59:12 we can see that um it talks about based documents and at the top
00:59:19 the top you can see under specification can you see the
00:59:22 see the second bullet point we've got the max fordham employers requirements for mep services
00:59:28 services do you remember reading those employers requirements i know full well that i read max forden's documentation cover
00:59:39 i read max forden's documentation cover to cover
00:59:40 to cover yeah at the start of the job um straight after um i started doing that straight after
00:59:52 um i started doing that straight after uh our first internal meeting on the project yes as a way of educating myself to what our scope of works were and getting as much information before
01:00:03 and getting as much information before we were on site so we get it running yes so
01:00:08 yes it was a lot of information to absorb yes in one sitting it would took a couple of days i would have reviewed various documents that were relevant to specific bits of work i was doing yes but yeah i would have seen
01:00:20 doing yes but yeah i would have seen them that documentation yeah and there's also reference there to max fordham grenfell tower smoke ventilation analysis revision a date of the 6th of may 2014. that was an analysis that max
01:00:31 may 2014. that was an analysis that max fordham did comparing the old airflow rate
01:00:35 rate with what was anticipated to be the new airflow rate in fact it said in the document to be the new airflow rate for a push-pull system um do you ever remember
01:00:46 system um do you ever remember looking at that document or considering it i would have looked at it yeah i would have seen it um yeah is the answer yeah and then we can see there's a description of the project below that
01:00:58 description of the project below that at 1.1.1 and then it begins um there's a section at the bottom of this page at 1.1.2 on the smoke control proposals and do
01:01:10 on the smoke control proposals and do you remember that at this stage there was a phase one proposal which is what they could do temporarily to try and get the system back up and running and then if we go over the page page
01:01:22 and then if we go over the page page four
01:01:25 four um there was then a phase two which was the permanent solution as part of the refurbishment we can see that at the bottom of that page
01:01:34 um at a predetermined take two will be implemented to convert the system into a fully mechanical extract system with a new smoke extract running standby set and fan starter panel
01:01:46 set and fan starter panel with inverted drivers pressure centers being fitted do you remember there being two proposals
01:01:53 proposals at this point um i do remember at the start of the project there being
01:02:00 something in place to get something some protection into into the building as as swiftly as possible and this would be the way of doing it yeah and can you remember
01:02:09 remember what happened to that in terms of a temporary solution i think this may have occurred and changes while i wasn't on
01:02:20 and changes while i wasn't on while i was away from the project so to be honest i couldn't answer that i haven't seen any information since and today that tells me exactly
01:02:33 since and today that tells me exactly why that happened right okay well it didn't happen in this case
01:02:37 case now if we could look now at paragraph 53 of your first statement on page seven
01:02:44 you tell us that you met building control for the first time during your first stint at grenfell tower and this was a design team meeting on the 24th of november 2014
01:02:55 on the 24th of november 2014 attended by others including representatives of j of ryden and j.s wright's own design team the work to the smoke control system was discussed including the extension of the existing shafts down through the lower part of the tower
01:03:07 through the lower part of the tower where the new apartments would be to be constructed now mr cross smith of max fordham tells us in his witness statement that this meeting was led by psb
01:03:19 that this meeting was led by psb and js wright in which the proposed works of a smoke ventilation system were discussed in detail with building control who in principle accepted the pressurization
01:03:30 accepted the pressurization system that psb and js wright were putting forward now first of all can you do you have any memory of that meeting at all can you remember it i do remember a
01:03:41 can you remember it i do remember a meeting where um
01:03:46 i met hugh from psb and i do remember sitting
01:03:53 in a space opposite grenfell tower tables laid out drawings out splitballing going on freshing out ideas i believe
01:04:05 freshing out ideas i believe architects would have been there just talking about how they overcome particularly issues with the project i think the main focus at that time
01:04:17 think the main focus at that time was um the new section below the existing residential area i think i mentioned
01:04:28 residential area i think i mentioned earlier
01:04:28 earlier about um it seemed unusual to me about building control's involvement the level of it
01:04:37 it's my recollection this sitting down discussion design team meeting
01:04:43 meeting um building control were active part of it
01:04:47 it right yes um do you remember the meeting being led by psb and js wright with building control there do you remember that um i would say that
01:05:01 um i would say that they'd always be led by ryden's as the principal contractor right but if specific things were the main topic on the agenda then that would
01:05:12 would swiftly be handed over to
01:05:16 the persons with the expertise yes yeah um if
01:05:22 um if if it's specifically talking about a dtm when we're talking to um smoke control systems just right's design team would be there as part of that dtm
01:05:34 as part of that dtm but there would be sitting there with the expert in the field sitting next to discussion there and when you talk about the expert in the field sitting there with them who are you talking about psp
01:05:46 are you talking about psp and i see i see yeah and but do you have a recollection of it being at this meeting that psb were presenting to building control
01:05:56 control an alternative solution a new solution and talking to them about what that new solution involved do you remember what the the specific
01:06:08 what the the specific dtm i can remember was focused around um the new areas below the existing residential yeah so
01:06:19 below the existing residential yeah so i think it that time
01:06:22 it's hard to say it's hard to get so you don't have a memory analogy of it sorry all right you're finished sorry yeah it's difficult to get the chronology of what happened when yes um
01:06:33 chronology of what happened when yes um there might be some dtm minutes sitting somewhere that might be clarified so do you not have a memory of a me a meeting with building control in which an alternative proposal which recommended
01:06:44 recommended um pressure differentials being used um being proposed to building control for their
01:06:50 for their in principle approval i don't remember a meeting where that was proposed i do remember being in meetings with psb with um jazz rights um
01:07:03 with um jazz rights um designer dave bradbury with writings in attendance with architects in in attendance where elements of the smoke control system were discussed
01:07:14 smoke control system were discussed whether it was that meeting where new ideas were put forward i can't be certain
01:07:23 certain okay
01:07:27 did you ever have any contact with x over at any stage either directly or indirectly about psb's proposals
01:07:40 i don't think so no did you ever think that it might be a good idea to ensure that psb's proposals were looked over by
01:07:50 over by a fire engineer as part of the checking process on the project looking thinking about things now most definitely thinking about my understanding of the
01:08:03 thinking about my understanding of the process
01:08:05 process um back then and now actually um i would have expected that to have occurred before any approval
01:08:15 approval was given yes any status to a technical submittal um so that just wasn't something that was um talked about or discussed as a
01:08:26 um talked about or discussed as a possibility not with me not with you not with me but i would have expected that to have occurred before um
01:08:37 install information come to me to assist um to deliver yeah that makes sense did anyone ever mention to you or state that
01:08:47 that um the proposal that was being put forward
01:08:51 forward was uh similar to something called the colt
01:08:54 colt shaft mechanical shaft system not at the time though
01:09:03 did anybody ever discuss in your presence
01:09:06 presence the fact that there were extended travel distances
01:09:11 distances at grenfell tower on the lobbies between some flat doors and the stair doors you ever remember there being any discussion about extended travel distances
01:09:23 it's very hard to recollect you know i've having a look over some documentation recently um just in that with some
01:09:34 um just in that with some information on fire strategy drawings um just having a look at that i could see on the new floors there was measurements for travel distance um
01:09:46 measurements for travel distance um there which i would have seen at the time um but also noted that on existing floors
01:09:52 floors um their measurements were absent right so there may have been discussion about travel distances yeah i can't recall exactly when yeah do you
01:10:05 i can't recall exactly when yeah do you yourself ever recall being aware that that the travel distances were in excess of the guidance for example in approved document b or in some other british
01:10:18 do you recall there ever being any discussion about the risks with this system of the fact that it might pull air from a fire affected flat into the
01:10:29 air from a fire affected flat into the lobby
01:10:30 lobby so you said that you were aware of the fact that it was taking air out of the lobby and hence the pressure there would be lower was there ever any discussion about the extent to which smoke might be pulled
01:10:42 extent to which smoke might be pulled from the fire the flat in which the fire was
01:10:45 was raging at the time no no not at all
01:10:59 raging at the time no no not at all did you yourself ever ask yourself the question
01:11:03 question whether this new design was an improvement on the existing system
01:11:10 yes i would say i would have done and i would
01:11:14 would be quite confident at the time to say it was
01:11:17 was yes and how satisfied were you at the time that it could actually work the system that was being proposed um at the time of install um
01:11:32 wholly reliant on information that's been approved you know just going for it so
01:11:41 for it so but when they actually got to this where the system was functional varying degrees across the job it was
01:11:51 quite surprised at the amount of air movement that was achieved um and my understanding of how things work um how the system was intended to work
01:12:05 um how the system was intended to work i was quite satisfied and um that it was doing the job and doing the job
01:12:12 job to the the best way it could it could do performing as well as it could do yeah
01:12:19 and when you say doing the job that was basically delivered by the air movement that yeah my understanding at the time is what we was trying to do is move air from one place to another to
01:12:30 is move air from one place to another to protect stairwells uh set stairways um the system egress in an emergency situation and firefighters coming in the building
01:12:40 building yeah and that was um my confidence in it was compounded by various visits from various people um including lfb
01:12:51 um including lfb with a number of their their guys come down to site and then walking away satisfied that would be a good tool in the event of you know worst case
01:13:02 in the event of you know worst case scenarios
01:13:04 scenarios yes thank you mr chairman i think that might be actually a good moment for the morning break yes and all right yes i'm making good progress and i'm hopeful that we might
01:13:15 progress and i'm hopeful that we might be able to finish this witness this morning
01:13:18 morning i think breaking now is a a good idea right thank you well mr white we have a break in the course of the morning and this is a good time at which to take it so we'll stop now we'll resume please
01:13:30 it so we'll stop now we'll resume please at half past eleven and i have to ask you not to talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it when you're out of the room okay thank you so if you gave me the usher she'll look after you thank you
01:13:51 thank you very much how fast eleven
01:31:34 you ask mr white to come back in please
01:31:50 all right mr white ready to carry on i am thank you very much yes it's grinch yes thank you just a few follow-up questions from this morning before i go back to my plan um we've seen some emails with david
01:32:01 um we've seen some emails with david bradbury of js wright on them this morning can you just explain um who was david bradbury um dave bradbee was
01:32:12 um dave bradbee was our internal design guy right yeah and what was his role on the grenfell tower project um him and others would have developed
01:32:24 um him and others would have developed the base
01:32:26 the base design from max folding into something that was workable on site in relation to jazz wright's area of expertise
01:32:37 expertise which was um plumbing and heating right services yeah yeah so a large aspect of the job was um a new
01:32:49 um a new boiler room as such a new boiler plant associated equipment and a new uh heating system and just to be clear did david bradbury
01:33:00 and just to be clear did david bradbury have any role in terms of the development of the design for the smoke control system on grenfell tower not to my knowledge i would was confidently saying no yeah who didn't been there to assist
01:33:13 yeah who didn't been there to assist flow of information yeah yeah and was he senior to you at jsr
01:33:17 jsr um we're two different departments right um but i'd say we were on first engagement he probably was slightly senior to me um second engagement definitely on the
01:33:28 um second engagement definitely on the part but we two different departments if we look at the internal structure it was a lot um above for instance to point of uh
01:33:39 for instance to point of uh um associate directors yeah there's only one person yeah in between right same as yes thank you
01:33:46 you if you look at an email now jsw40
01:33:58 and i just want to look at the second email down this was an email much later in the project um from paul hanson to david hughes of ryden
01:34:07 ryden copying in john hoban steve blake and you at this point 4th of may 2016 and paul hanson he queries something
01:34:18 and paul hanson he queries something about the figures in the first part of the email
01:34:20 the email and then he says in the last part remember that the testing of the powered vent system we are witnessing tomorrow should be in accordance with section 9 an item
01:34:28 an item of the attached sca guide and he attached the 2015 sca guide and provided that do you remember that i do yeah yeah and i think you've referred to it earlier in your evidence
01:34:38 evidence yes um did you ever notice that none of the
01:34:42 the technical submissions that were prepared by psb
01:34:46 by psb referred to that sca guide
01:34:50 no i didn't notice that and i haven't noticed that since to be honest it surprises me right yeah was it your understanding at the time that the system had been designed in accordance
01:35:01 system had been designed in accordance with the guidance in that sca guide it's my understanding now the sc sca guide
01:35:12 is an aid to the smoke control association bringing together because i think that's in vega he's in the um british standards as far as i'm aware maybe incorrect but it's something which
01:35:25 maybe incorrect but it's something which as it says is a guide to assist people in the industry so thinking about it now um i suppose it would be a relevant document
01:35:36 document to get some specifics in what you need to do to prove systems yes yeah yes but that was not something that occurred to you at the time no no um can i just look at mr mani's
01:35:48 um can i just look at mr mani's statement now um this is psb401329
01:35:55 on page 11.
01:36:00 so sub paragraph three it just to explain the context in this part of his statement mr mani is explaining some of the key changes in the design that occurred
01:36:11 that occurred as the technical submission progressed through the project because as we know there were six revisions that technical submission and here what he says is as well as the configuration of the extended smoke
01:36:23 configuration of the extended smoke shafts another detail which was finalized after the initial design work recorded in revision one of the technical submission was the specification and location of the fan sets used in the system
01:36:34 the fan sets used in the system initially it was envisaged that the north and south smoke shafts would be connected at the top of the building and that they would feed into a single smoke extract fan set located at roof level however given that
01:36:48 located at roof level however given that an environmental fan needed to be installed at low level and given the space limitations at grenfell tower the design was changed to incorporate one smoke extract fan set in the rooftop plant room which
01:37:01 fan set in the rooftop plant room which was used to extract via the north shaft in both environmental and smoke control mode
01:37:05 mode another smoke extract fan set at walkway level which was used to extract via the south shafts in smoke control mode and an environmental supply fan at walkway level which was used to supply the makeup air
01:37:18 which was used to supply the makeup air via the south shaft in environmental mode this arrangement is reflected in revision five of the technical submission onwards i also confirmed to js write an exchange
01:37:29 i also confirmed to js write an exchange email exchange in september sorry that that's about the duct work so so focusing on that change that mr marnie's
01:37:37 marnie's um talking about there so instead of extracting up upwards both north and south shaft and to one single set of fans at the top of the building this change to extracting downwards down
01:37:50 this change to extracting downwards down the south shaft and out at the bottom levels of the building do you remember that change to the design occurring um i remember
01:38:03 i remember looking at the possibility of linking to the charts at the top of the building now
01:38:10 now as i've kept saying i've been the guy on the site that would facilitate certain things happening and i remember quite clearly looking at where the
01:38:22 quite clearly looking at where the shaft that didn't protrude up into the roof space was coming up yes and looking at the practicalities of linking the two shafts as
01:38:31 as um psb proposed yes and
01:38:38 yes and without some serious changes to things like water tanks um
01:38:45 um moving kit and
01:38:49 cutting large holes in walls it would have been
01:38:52 have been impossible right yeah so i think this is where that change come from yes and and were you involved in advising back to the specialist designers that that change simply wasn't practical at that
01:39:03 change simply wasn't practical at that no which i would have been up to have a look yeah to see um who was with me at the time i don't know but
01:39:11 know but i can clearly remember looking at the feasibility of linking the two two shafts with that work in the roof space yes and thinking
01:39:23 yes and thinking there's a lot of work to do that yeah yeah and do you remember having any discussions with psb about this um second phase of this design the extract
01:39:35 phase of this design the extract south through the south shaft downwards through the south shaft do you ever remember having any discussions with psb about that that revision to the design from
01:39:45 from a design perspective i would say quite certainly no um this would be you know we've got a proposal
01:39:53 proposal i'm engaged on the on on site i'm looking at helping you know psb wouldn't necessarily have someone on site you know i'd have a look to see if it was practical maybe
01:40:04 was practical maybe give some advice back yes others would investigate probably come to the same conclusions as i did and then that set of challenges would have to be overcome with an adaption of the design
01:40:15 overcome with an adaption of the design yes again done by the specialists i understand yeah yeah but you didn't ever have a discussion with mr mani about the pros and cons of reverting no to
01:40:26 the pros and cons of reverting no to this
01:40:26 this different design taking it down through the south shaft not to the best of my knowledge though and just to be absolutely clear do you ever remember psb expressing any concerns about that
01:40:37 psb expressing any concerns about that design change at the time
01:40:41 i don't but like i say we in a in my role on the project i'm there to deliver or assist in
01:40:52 i'm there to deliver or assist in delivering um approved systems so as that approval document comes through i then switch into right okay that's approved that's what we're doing
01:41:03 that's approved that's what we're doing how do we get it in how can i help others get in and deliver a project for a client yes yeah i understand now moving on to the topic of dampers that were used in the system if
01:41:15 dampers that were used in the system if we look at paragraph 71 little paragraph two of your witness statement your first statement on page 11.
01:41:24 it's right at the bottom of the page you tell us that you understand that the following aov smoke control works were completed as part of the m e parcel of works and you say new dampers were ordered
01:41:35 and you say new dampers were ordered from gilbert in accordance with the psb specification data sheets do you see that there i do now to what extent did you consider whether the individual
01:41:47 whether the individual components provided for psb's design for the system were suitable and appropriate
01:41:55 to be honest with that um i think like i said a couple of times when
01:42:03 something has been determined by the design team and approved and sent to site as such as that's what we're installing i assume that has already been done
01:42:16 i assume that has already been done yes i see yeah so consideration
01:42:21 relating to the components and whether they're correct um it's not something i would of something i'll be aware of but not something i would be
01:42:33 something i would be considering checking yes i see yes and just to test that a little yeah we can see in the documents that these dampers
01:42:45 these dampers begin to be suggested in psb's technical submission so that they're being submitted to js wright those technical submissions and it's got those gilbert stampers
01:42:56 and it's got those gilbert stampers in it so who did you think when you say i thought that would have already been considered who are you referring to there that you thought had already considered the suitability of those components so
01:43:07 suitability of those components so i would have expected that once a solution had come up to a particular challenge on site
01:43:19 and the solution discussed in the background with members of the design team building control potentially and a document drafted
01:43:30 and a document drafted containing the detail when that was submitted
01:43:33 submitted that would have been checked by the consultant in this case max fordham um and any other relevant party that was involved in the approval of that before it come back to site to say
01:43:45 it come back to site to say that's what we're doing yes yes you see max fordham have told us mr cross smith yesterday said that he absolutely wasn't doing a checking function he was
01:43:56 function he was retained by the tmo to advise them and in general terms was keeping tabs with what was going on on the project and reporting back to his client
01:44:05 client but he wasn't checking certainly not things like the detail of of the components that had been specified where did you get your understanding from that that's what max
01:44:16 understanding from that that's what max fordham were doing they were the consultant and that was my understanding of their role i'm quite shocked when i heard that yesterday
01:44:26 yesterday right i was listening to proceedings and did you ever check with any of your superiors within just right what their role was
01:44:35 role was and who who was it that needed to be checking these components um i can't say specifically yes but the whole process
01:44:46 specifically yes but the whole process of a technical submittal is a document whether it be something from a specialist or something direct that js writer the experts in would be forwarded with a supporting
01:44:59 would be forwarded with a supporting page which asks for a status you know a b c c fails b is proceed with comment a is approved so this what i just don't understand why
01:45:13 so this what i just don't understand why we'd be submitting information to someone for comment approval if that wasn't their role to do it i see
01:45:21 it i see are you actually saying you recall max fordham
01:45:25 fordham annotating documents with approval like a
01:45:28 a b c as you just yes not 100 certain it would relate to this but i would see
01:45:35 would see sheets come back with comment right from max fordham yes i see okay and so does it follow from your answers that you yourself never considered
01:45:46 considered the fire rating of the dampers and whether the product that had been specified had the appropriate fire rating and fire certification i wouldn't have done i would have i would have taken it that that had
01:45:58 would have taken it that that had already been determined and approved before
01:46:01 before yeah yeah did you know at the time that there were different types of damper that could be specified that there was perhaps something called fire dampers then fire and smoke dampers
01:46:12 fire dampers then fire and smoke dampers and then smoke control damage did you have any awareness of that not too
01:46:17 too uh at a level a technical level enough to understand what
01:46:24 what was used for what if you can see what i'm saying yeah sorry from not as eloquent as i'd like yes no that's fine um let's move on now to commissioning and approval
01:46:36 commissioning and approval um that stage of the process if we go to psb
01:46:40 psb four zeros one one five two
01:46:49 and if we look at page eight of this clip
01:46:56 these are so this sheet and then um so these are the environmental mode readings on this sheet you can see that from the bottom
01:47:07 that from the bottom text on this page and then if we go over the page to page nine
01:47:13 we see readings
01:47:18 that are relevant to the smoke control system you can see the floor levels then the open door meters per second reading the speeds at different grills low speed high speed
01:47:29 high speed at the different grills do you remember ever seeing these readings taken by psb i've seen these readings um as far as
01:47:41 these readings um as far as seeing these particular set of readings being taken from peer speed the answer to that would be no right yeah
01:47:52 so you say i've seen these readings as far as seeing this particular set of readings being taken from psb the answer to that's no so sorry what distinction are you drawing here oh sorry um
01:48:05 can you would you mind asking your question again yes do you ever remember seeing sheets like this with readings on which were the readings taken during psb's
01:48:16 psb's testing and commissioning process most definitely so um from your original question i've just i took the you was asking me whether i was present when these particular
01:48:27 was present when these particular readings were taken sorry i see i understand so you weren't present when they were taken but you do remember seeing them subsequently do you ever did you ever inspect
01:48:36 inspect these this kind of information and check it
01:48:39 it against the design yeah so
01:48:44 i obviously become more and more familiar with what the system was meant to do after initial demonstrations and um talking with psb site guys um
01:49:00 with psb site guys um being privy and present at demonstrations um and understood what the system was meant to do and what this meant
01:49:12 so yes yes thank you and were you ever aware that there might be particular british standards that might be relevant to the types of tests you would need to carry out on the smoke
01:49:23 you would need to carry out on the smoke control system um i think i did mention this one earlier just um smoke control associations guide 2015 yes
01:49:35 associations guide 2015 yes i was aware that there was different criteria for demonstrating performance depending on what system it was yes yeah
01:49:46 depending on what system it was yes yeah but that was the extent of your knowledge was it you didn't know whether there were other british standards which might be relevant to the testing and commissioning process i'm sure they would but um i was
01:49:57 i'm sure they would but um i was like i think like i said earlier but the smoke controllation guy was a summary of what needed to be done for different types of system yes and if we go back to the readings again
01:50:08 again psb psb401152 and look at page nine you can see that you you're getting one open door meter per second reading when you read this what did you
01:50:20 reading when you read this what did you understand that figure to represent um
01:50:26 the speed or velocity of air moving through that opening yes and did you understand from reading this that had been one test done of that or did you understand that this was an
01:50:37 or did you understand that this was an average of a number of tests um see this is where at the time and present yeah come um just conflict a little bit now when i'd
01:50:50 now when i'd seen readings taken and system was shown to me
01:50:54 to me by psp um it was only one reading taken at the center
01:51:04 um i do know what the commissioning engineer
01:51:11 engineer who commissioned the system responsible for commissioning system has said and i'd be quite confident that what he said is what he did he's taken i see so averages yeah so in a very specific way
01:51:23 specific way there could well have been a difference between what he did during his commissioning process and what you saw when
01:51:28 when he then demonstrated the system yeah and when you had it demonstrated to you you would just see one reading being taken on each door is that right that's correct
01:51:38 correct and do you remember seeing a reading being taken for each level every single one was that demonstrated to you i'd asked um the commissioning
01:51:49 i'd asked um the commissioning engineer to show me the system ahead of demonstration so sorry i'm probably going off in attendance could you repeat your question yes so
01:52:01 could you repeat your question yes so when it was demonstrated to you you said you remember seeing a one reading being taken for each level yes
01:52:08 yes yes uh or one one taken on each door do you remember how many levels you saw that on or was it just a sample i could quite confidently say it was every level right yeah now door force
01:52:20 right yeah now door force opening door force did you understand that one of the things that had to be checked as part of the commissioning process was that the the force on the door
01:52:29 door the stair door was not too uh strong so that it could actually be opened by residents who were escaping i did understand that yeah let's go to an email psb401152
01:52:50 this is an email from david harrison psb to jonathan earl j.s wright i believe
01:52:59 believe um and it's dated the 26th of may 2016 and if we look at the third paragraph down it reads the control system will also has pressure sensors added
01:53:11 will also has pressure sensors added into each ventilated lobby to control the speed of the fans to ensure that when the doors on the escape routes are closed that the opening force on the door does not exceed 100 newtons as
01:53:23 not exceed 100 newtons as detailed in and then this british standard
01:53:26 standard 12101 part 6. this was witnessed by your mr alan white and the reading which was not recorded in our commissioning sheets but read as 85
01:53:37 commissioning sheets but read as 85 newtons
01:53:38 newtons on the scale provided by j s wright so is it right that you were involved with some
01:53:46 with some testing of those door opening forces with psb um as yeah i wouldn't say
01:53:58 as yeah i wouldn't say i was involved in the testing um as part of
01:54:05 familiarization of the system for what i would have to do at a later date um
01:54:17 do you remember i was shown yeah sorry i was i was shown certain things um this gets this is where my memory does and exact dates of
01:54:29 my memory does and exact dates of and the um chronology of what occurred when
01:54:32 when does come in it is slightly fuzzy um i don't know how much detail you want me to go into right now but in well it might help if we
01:54:43 well it might help if we break this down a little bit sorry let me know
01:54:46 me know um first of all do you remember either you or anyone else from js wright providing a scale or a some sort of graduated spring balance i
01:54:57 some sort of graduated spring balance i remember
01:54:58 remember going out and purchasing something very basic
01:55:02 basic that would enable someone to see a false um that was applied to a door right and do you remember seeing anyone do a test on a door
01:55:14 seeing anyone do a test on a door to see what the force was that was required to open it right so um initially during show-and-tells from psp to me about how the system works and
01:55:26 psp to me about how the system works and operated and i do believe in first sets of demonstrations um the test as such was it could be easily opened you know so you could
01:55:38 easily opened you know so you could stand there i think how has explained it explained to me
01:55:43 to me is if
01:55:47 is if think about an elderly lady trying to open the door yes and that's sort of false but nothing technical or accurate nothing measured um
01:56:03 it wasn't until a late later date that i come
01:56:06 come aware of this poor false yeah and there's me thinking right okay building control and others want to see they've got a set of criteria here they're expecting to see yes how do we show them yes hence
01:56:19 yes how do we show them yes hence a quick dash down to somewhere where i could buy something that could give a reading yes do you remember that you had to buy something that showed the force in
01:56:31 something that showed the force in newtons
01:56:32 newtons um from the places where i was going to buy something that could give a reading of of that soul
01:56:43 a reading of of that soul um it would have been in metric or imperial
01:56:47 imperial rather than pounds foot-pounds or um kilograms yes um rather than um the more technical moving me is and when
01:56:58 the more technical moving me is and when you came back with that measuring device because you obtained that device yes do you remember actually using that device to test i do yeah doors and do you remember testing one door
01:57:11 testing one door or do you remember testing multiple doors my memory is fuzzy on this but um
01:57:18 my my the thing that sticks in my mind of why i dashed out to go and get that device
01:57:26 was to show interested parties what the actual pull fault of that door was so rather than using it for
01:57:39 so rather than using it for a system check or test but literally there was a tool so we could like during the demonstrations that initially psp would have done
01:57:51 there was something because you can remember that they didn't have the kit yes to show it yeah so i don't remember the process outside of
01:58:02 i don't remember the process outside of them
01:58:03 them outside of a demonstration right where that process was was done yes because in his evidence mr partner
01:58:10 partner psp said that you pulled the doors open took the readings and you wrote the readings down i can't recall that yeah
01:58:23 um and do you remember noticing that um the commissioning report that had been produced by psb didn't have any any record of door readings in it at all
01:58:34 readings in it at all do you remember noticing that
01:58:42 it's obvious now um at the time um i think it was covered in like a statement that said it was between this and this
01:58:50 and this but on the actual commissioning report it wasn't there right yeah and um mr partlow told the inquiry that he subsequently asked for these readings
01:59:01 subsequently asked for these readings but was never provided with them do you have a recollection of being asked to provide readings of the door pull force i don't no thank you now
01:59:13 i don't no thank you now let's go to psb's commissioning report this is at psb 50224
01:59:27 so we can see from the top it's psb and it's called above ground commissioning report and it's dated the 28th of april 2016. it's got
01:59:37 it's got mr partlow's name on as the engineer and if we turn on within it to page seven
01:59:48 we can see that
01:59:52 mr partlow has signed it but also you have signed it for js wright is that correct that's correct
02:00:02 now can you explain why you were putting your signature on that report and what responsibility you were taking for that report
02:00:13 for that report this would have been after the system had been shown to me as operable
02:00:22 operable i would have seen the testing procedure that psb's onsite guys would have gone through and
02:00:34 onsite guys would have gone through and that was me signing off on behalf of js wright to say that their package of works were complete
02:00:45 complete yes to get to a point where
02:00:50 financial um um more from a financial perspective so right that's our work's complete we can release
02:01:01 can release a certain amount of the rest of their contractual monies and part of retention yes pretty much that's that's me saying what
02:01:11 what i've seen that the system's operating yeah
02:01:14 yeah demonstrated to me yeah um these are the readings that we're looking for that's what we're getting um
02:01:23 um yeah in your statement you make clear this
02:01:27 this for the transcript this is that paragraph one two two on page 20 you you make clear that you weren't signing this to confirm that you'd independently checked and verified all the results
02:01:38 the results is that right yeah i don't think at the time or now i'll be the right person to be doing that yes i understand but you were signing it to effectively acknowledge
02:01:49 signing it to effectively acknowledge receipt of the report that you'd witnessed the system being demonstrated yes and that you were signing off on that part of psp's work is that correct absolutely thank you
02:02:08 if we go to now to jsw402945
02:02:19 if we go to now to jsw402945 and if we look at page two
02:02:23 at the bottom of this page is an email from david bradbury on the 3rd of may 2016 to mr harrison at psb and copying in yourself there
02:02:36 and copying in yourself there it's subject grenfell tower building control demo and it says morning david allen will be with building control tomorrow to do some final demonstrations
02:02:47 some final demonstrations one being the airflow measurement across the dampers on on the floor levels the technical submission states an average of two meters per second velocity across the lobby stairwell door
02:02:58 stairwell door but are you splitting the flow rate across the two dampers question mark and then over the page basically can you confirm what meters cubed per second reading we should be
02:03:11 cubed per second reading we should be demonstrating to building control at each damper
02:03:18 so that that's an that's the email that's being sent by js wright to to psb asking for a meters cube per second reading and making clear that you're going to be at
02:03:29 making clear that you're going to be at site
02:03:30 site the next day to if we go back one page just so we can look at again at what that said you'll be with with building control tomorrow so that
02:03:41 with building control tomorrow so that would be the 4th of may to do some final demonstrations one being the airflow measurement across the dampers on all the floor levels and do you remember
02:03:52 and do you remember being with building control at that time and and conducting some airflow measurements i do yes and were those meters per second measurements that you were
02:04:04 measurements that you were demonstrating to building control they were yes so the velocity across yes correct yeah
02:04:13 now
02:04:16 on page two in your response two emails above at 1 36 pm we can see you say on the 3rd of may
02:04:27 we can see you say on the 3rd of may to david hughes and steve blake at ryden dave the attached doc grenfell tower readings in fire details high and low speed reading for high and low grills as well as door
02:04:38 for high and low grills as well as door velocity
02:04:40 velocity alan white
02:04:44 and you attached the sheet of readings from psb that we've already seen yes to this email and then if we go up the thread at the bottom of page one
02:04:57 the thread at the bottom of page one and over the page we can see then there's an email from david hughes to paul hanson
02:05:09 and if we look at what's said at the top of page two please see attached air speed readings for the smoke extract ventilation system at grenfell tower please let me know if you need any further information prior
02:05:20 you need any further information prior to thursday kind regards dave so those speed readings are sent to building control and then if we go back to page one in the email above that
02:05:31 we can see on the fourth of may we've already looked at this email but this time i want to look at the beginning of it
02:05:36 it 4th of may 2016. mr hansen says to david hughes of ryden hi david the figures you've sent do not appear to be extract readings they should be in
02:05:48 be extract readings they should be in meters cubed per second the readings you've sent are velocity readings in meters per second
02:05:57 now were you aware at this time that building control were insisting on seeing
02:06:03 seeing readings taken in cubit meters per second rather than velocity readings and did you understand why it was that building control wanted those readings instead i didn't
02:06:16 wanted those readings instead i didn't was that ever explained to you um
02:06:23 i don't think it was i don't recollect it ever being explained to me why they wanted that yeah if we go to another email thread on this topic
02:06:34 jsw403529
02:06:42 in the second email down on this page mr harrison at psb says to mr bradbury js wright again copying you
02:06:53 copying you and mr parlow in 8th of june 2016. we've received your correspondence and would comment as follows and various comments are provided an
02:07:04 and various comments are provided an anemometer measures velocity not volume flow
02:07:07 flow as far as i'm aware there are no products in the marketplace which can measure the volume flow rate but i might be wrong
02:07:13 be wrong should additional tests be required by the building control we're unable to accommodate the requests on this occasion suggest you contact a specialist organization to fulfill their requirements we don't
02:07:24 to fulfill their requirements we don't understand why they won't accept the simple calculation we put forward as this is a standard format in our industry
02:07:29 industry not to mention the standard method in the hvca industry while there's a requirement for a smoke ventilators at the head of a stairwell there are no requirements in any standards or code of practice for there to be an automatic
02:07:40 to be an automatic opening ventilator at the base of a stairwell
02:07:43 stairwell and then our commissioning results show that the system is achieving the design requirement without an arv at the base of the stairs so the last two comments relate to whether there needed to be an aov
02:07:51 aov at the base of the stair and the first two are about um basically pushing back is that right isn't that right and saying we don't understand why they want volume readings rather than
02:08:02 readings rather than velocity readings yes yes and then if we go to the top of the thread
02:08:11 on this page we can see david bradbury says to jonathan l copying you in 28th of july 2016. john i'd ignore that previous email for now as i've just
02:08:22 previous email for now as i've just found the email below where i chase them for a response as dave h has said we'll see if the client accepts the comments put forward
02:08:32 so it would appear that the way it was left was well let's see if building control come back again is that correct
02:08:40 correct well this is just right fitting their role as
02:08:43 role as conduit of information no building control vast for something our client that's then passed on to psp for comment they've provided comment and
02:08:54 comment they've provided comment and that's passed back yes and as far as you're concerned where were any volume readings ever provided to building control
02:09:03 i don't think so no i don't think so yeah
02:09:06 yeah okay now
02:09:09 okay now i want to ask you some questions about a demonstration that was carried out on the 26th of march 2016. if we look at paragraph 100 of your first statement
02:09:20 first statement page 17
02:09:25 you explain in this paragraph you say on the 23rd of march 2016 i was present at a demonstration of the bms the building management system
02:09:34 system during which the interface with the aov the automatic opening events was demonstrated also present were matt smith max fordham tony batty silcox dawson dave hughes ryden and an engineer from
02:09:47 dave hughes ryden and an engineer from dcs direct control systems responsible for the wiring and interfacing
02:09:54 so um you were present at that demonstration and if we go um to jsw401889
02:10:05 and if we go um to jsw401889 at page two this is one of the exhibits to your witness statement
02:10:17 witness statement and uh what it is is an agenda for this building management system witnessing do you see that i do see that um that's
02:10:31 do see that um that's more than an agenda but so rather than the agenda i'd say that's matt foldham's findings
02:10:36 findings uh i see so you think this is actually the notes of of what occurred at the at this witnessing yes as it's described here i understand now can you just help us who ultimately
02:10:47 now can you just help us who ultimately was responsible for demonstrating that the building management system was working on this occasion the building management system um
02:11:02 responsibility for showing it was working um our specialist subcontractor dcs um controls systems i think that's uh i don't know if it's go um would have
02:11:15 i don't know if it's go um would have been
02:11:16 been there to demonstrate that element of the plant room yes yes um
02:11:28 yes yes um the rest of this plant area um i would have been doing it right yeah and you you say in
02:11:39 right yeah and you you say in your first witness statement paragraph 104 that
02:11:42 104 that it was not the purpose of this demonstration to prove the full functionality of the aov system to what extent during this demonstration was the aav system
02:11:53 demonstration was the aav system demonstrated at all um in this particular bit the only function that was demonstrated was the interface between the building
02:12:05 was the interface between the building management system and the smart control system right yeah um to show certain bits with doing what
02:12:16 show certain bits with doing what they're supposed to yes yeah and and effectively was it mainly testing that the smoke control system's activation caused the boilers in the building to
02:12:27 caused the boilers in the building to shut off um what he was there to do was to activate the building management systems safety circuit
02:12:33 circuit yeah which then has a causing effect yes and one of them one of those is shutting down
02:12:38 down the boilers yes thank you and is it right that building control was not at that demonstration that particular one
02:12:49 particular one that would be correct and it doesn't look like psb were involved either is that correct um i wouldn't have expected him to right to be
02:13:06 now um
02:13:09 there was then a demonstration on the 28th of april 2016. if we go to paragraph 111 of your first statement on page 19.
02:13:22 you say i was present on site for the first aov demonstration which took place on the 28th of april 2016. on this occasion there were representatives from the lfb granville partlow psb dave hughes ryden
02:13:37 granville partlow psb dave hughes ryden i believe that matt smith of max fordham was present and you go on to tell us at paragraph 113
02:13:46 113 that you say on that date the system operated as intended and i recall that everyone present was content with the demonstration now can you just help us what was the
02:13:57 can you just help us what was the process that was adopted for this demonstration um this i'm quite more familiar with the next exactly what happened on the next
02:14:10 next exactly what happened on the next demonstration because there's documentation to support it this on this one it would have been psb fulfilling part of their
02:14:21 psb fulfilling part of their obligation to demonstrate the system um to those in attendance yes so it would have been from
02:14:33 yes so it would have been from my recollection of what happened on that day there would have been a familiarization
02:14:43 [Music] letting people know what the system done and how it done it in lay in laypersons terms and then followed up by
02:14:58 showing people what happened when the system was working right um
02:15:10 that would have been activating the system
02:15:13 system um showing that the system's components were working as they should yes but we're in fan speeds under certain conditions
02:15:25 certain conditions um automatic changeos of of duty and standby fans um automatic changeovers of primary and secondary power suppliers yes yeah and the like
02:15:38 yes yeah and the like and would you have gone and looked at different levels to check that say the level where it activated was open and the other levels were closed from a demonstration at a demonstration
02:15:49 from a demonstration at a demonstration it's um
02:15:53 typical
02:15:56 to ask someone to pick do the amount and location of floors yes to do the testing um if you can imagine if you've got i know
02:16:08 if you can imagine if you've got i know some people have said there's been there was a couple of people from the lfb from my recollection there was more than that i'm sure you can understand that their time is precious and uh
02:16:20 time is precious and uh sorry my understanding is their time is precious and they wouldn't want to go for a full um
02:16:27 system check commissioning record and it would literally be this is how the system works and this is how it work in a
02:16:35 in a few locations yes i understand and just to be clear building control was not present at this demonstration now unfortunately i couldn't attend um how the process if you imagine psp they
02:16:47 how the process if you imagine psp they were
02:16:48 were not london based yeah their engineers were not london-based they were down to site for the last part of their contractual works which should have led on to the final demonstration
02:17:00 have led on to the final demonstration um i think when was it a point where they certainly be ready for that our clients would have been informed of that and the process of
02:17:11 that and the process of getting the right people at the right time um
02:17:14 time um started and unfortunately building control couldn't be there at that time right yes and can you remember was um were there representatives from the tmo there at that time
02:17:29 there at that time it's hard to say i do apologize it stands from what you're saying like you think there were more people there than you've listed here but you can't remember exactly who those people are now um you know the information
02:17:41 now um you know the information you had earlier from max baldwin about what happened when with minutes and all that sort of nothing like that was a document like that wasn't uh kept yes with the findings so that would
02:17:53 kept yes with the findings so that would have been helpful but i just can't tell you who exactly was there apart from knowing there's the fire brigade there the guy demonstrating it our clients representative dave hughes
02:18:04 representative dave hughes and knowing matt smith from maxwell museum
02:18:07 museum yes i can remember those people were there mr white um i think you're speaking quite fast and also sometimes you're jumping in before i've quite finished the question and i think that means that it's hard to
02:18:18 and i think that means that it's hard to transcribe so if you could just try and i do apologize slow down a little bit that's helpful um now matt cross smith in his statement refers to the
02:18:30 smith in his statement refers to the fact that there were some pull test demonstrations taking place on a number of doors on this occasion do you remember that i think this goes back to what we was
02:18:41 i think this goes back to what we was mentioning earlier about popping out to get a bit of kit so we could
02:18:48 we could show some form of reading so this would have been as we've just mentioned um in various random locations
02:19:00 um in various random locations right i see yes that's helpful and mr cross smith also says in his statement
02:19:07 statement that the override at the ground floor hmi panel was demonstrated to show that firefighters could manually override the system from this point do you remember demonstrating that i
02:19:19 do you remember demonstrating that i remember
02:19:20 remember being present when psp sorry i beg your pardon yes um do you ever remember any detailed instructions being provided to the lfb about how that hmi
02:19:31 provided to the lfb about how that hmi panel worked and what all the different uh possibilities were for activating that panel
02:19:42 i don't know if the full technical information was ever shared with lfb but i do
02:19:53 lfb but i do as far as information there was
02:19:59 something that come through from building control about some simple instructions to be placed at the control panel which dave hughes from ryden's quite
02:20:10 which dave hughes from ryden's quite nicely put together
02:20:14 i think i do remember seeing some text from
02:20:17 from a building regulation saying that the instruction should be simple and he's easy to understand something along them lines i may be mistaken but that is what's
02:20:28 mistaken but that is what's in my mind right yeah in answer to your question
02:20:32 question i was not aware
02:20:36 through not having direct correspondence with lfb whether they had full technical information on the system
02:20:44 system yes um
02:20:47 yes um in paragraph 75 of your first statement at page 13 uh you explain how the system would sound upon activation and firstly you say that upon detecting
02:20:58 and firstly you say that upon detecting smoke one would hear the sound make the system making a low hum is that correct
02:21:04 correct yes yeah
02:21:07 and then you tell us that when the lift lobby door opened you would hear a loud noise as the fans ramped up is that correct that is correct now i appreciate that
02:21:19 that is correct now i appreciate that this is a difficult question to answer but how loud were the fans at that point can you compare it to a an everyday noise that you might hear and and tell
02:21:31 noise that you might hear and and tell us whether it was similar to that um it would be dependent on where you're standing
02:21:38 standing um if you were say on one of the lower floors close to the fans that were in the lower part of the building
02:21:49 part of the building the noise coming from the duckball noise in that area would be quite loud
02:21:57 i'm trying to think of the recognized terms
02:22:00 terms in the db scale
02:22:06 you definitely have to raise your voice just to to speak to someone in your proximity right yes i see that's yes that's very helpful thank you
02:22:18 thank you um did anyone ever discuss with you or do you remember anyone else discussing the possibility of using a cold smoke machine to test the system for example by taking a vacant flat
02:22:31 for example by taking a vacant flat and actually doing some tests with a quantity of smoke i don't recall it at the time
02:22:41 now moving on then we know that there was
02:22:45 was another demonstration on the 5th of may 2016 with building control present that's right isn't it that's correct and if we look at paragraph 128 of your first statement on page 21
02:23:00 you explain there you say i met with rbkc building control representatives paul hanson on site on 5th of may 2016. prior to doing so i sent by email to
02:23:11 prior to doing so i sent by email to paul hanson a copy of the cause and effect
02:23:14 effect revision 4 schematic and des ops technical submission revision 6 for the smoke control system and you go on and say i explained
02:23:25 you go on and say i explained that at short notice the specialist from psb granville partly was unable to attend but that i would do what i could to assist in the demonstration
02:23:36 to assist in the demonstration now did you consider yourself qualified to be able to demonstrate the performance of the system to building control not qualified no why not wait for mr partlow or someone
02:23:48 why not wait for mr partlow or someone else at psb to be available given that it was psb who designed and commissioned the system um the answer to that is time constraint i can't remember
02:24:01 time constraint i can't remember obviously that would a question that would have been asked the answer would have come back we have engineers available at this time
02:24:13 all the time while we're our clients are trying to achieve pr practical completion of the project and um building control acceptance would be a
02:24:23 a a part of that um process of our client obtaining practical completion
02:24:33 um after being having the system demonstrated to me and being present at a demonstration
02:24:46 i felt that i could repeat what had been shown right
02:24:58 and what was mr hansen told that psb couldn't be present at the demonstration i believe so
02:25:08 did you check with him whether he was nevertheless happy to proceed
02:25:14 there's some correspondence around this um i can't remember exact wording
02:25:22 wording and is it right that the fifth of may 2016 was the only on-site demonstration for building control
02:25:32 control i believe that's the case
02:25:37 and mr partlow said in his statement that when he'd done the demonstration on the 28th of april 2016 he answered questions from all those present about the system and its
02:25:48 present about the system and its operation
02:25:49 operation were you in a position to answer questions during the demonstration on the 5th of may 2016.
02:26:02 there may have been some questions i could have comfortably answered if there was any questions i couldn't have comfortably answered i would refer back to our experts
02:26:13 i would refer back to our experts as our specialists right i see
02:26:18 if we look at paragraphs 130 and 131 of your statement page 21.
02:26:25 page 21. um you tell us 130 i recall on this occasion this is dealing with the same visit
02:26:30 visit paul hanson and i were in a lyft lobby when the demonstration took place when the system kicked into smoke mode the vents opened as intended we could feel the movement of air flat
02:26:41 we could feel the movement of air flat doors slammed and the letterboxes and the flat doors opened and shut and then you go on you say on this occasion paul hansen tested the door from the lobby to the stairwell and he was able to open it without too much
02:26:52 was able to open it without too much difficulty paul hanson was testing the pull strength required to open the door while the aov system was activated to prove the compliance of the specific requirements which had been set to be a maximum of 100 newtons
02:27:04 maximum of 100 newtons now do you remember were any measurements actually taken during this demonstration so when we're doing this demonstration
02:27:14 it's to show the systems working as intended so taking measurements and recording them recording them
02:27:25 recording them i don't think that is what the essence of a demonstration is about that's should be covered in the commissioning beforehand this would would this whole visit would
02:27:37 this would would this whole visit would have been a repeat of what um psb had done um as a demonstration so we would have
02:27:48 as a demonstration so we would have had a run down in the system but to be quite frank of it mr hansen would have been more
02:27:55 been more knowledgeable about smoke ventilation that smoke control systems and this specific um smoke control system
02:28:06 specific um smoke control system denier but he's going through a series of
02:28:09 of this is what the system does yes activating the system yeah showing the fan speeds ramp up and down
02:28:16 down right showing that the um fans the duty and standby fans would um automatically change over on failure
02:28:27 automatically change over on failure primary power supplies key switches work the components of the system were working as intended yes i understand mr hansen has described
02:28:38 yes i understand mr hansen has described this
02:28:39 this this uh demonstration in his statement and he describes it as limited to the sequence of operation of the system is that a fair description in your view
02:28:51 is that a fair description in your view sequence of operations limited to the sequence of operation of the system by which i think he means limited to showing him the steps
02:28:59 steps of operation of the system as they as it went through during your demonstration um i think with
02:29:07 with the addition of some
02:29:13 localized random performance testing yes i.e door poles and um velocities across the open door
02:29:24 and um velocities across the open door right yes thank you and did building control did mr hansen express any concerns at all during the demonstration i can't recall concerns and that was
02:29:39 confirmed that mushroom confirms the word but
02:29:42 word but with the issue of a letter of comfort that i'd seen from ryden's um there was a i think one or two items
02:29:55 there was a i think one or two items that he'd asked from some attention to be given to the time control system as a whole um other than that
02:30:06 i'm quite sure they was content with it thank you yes thank you now if we go to paragraph
02:30:13 paragraph um 143 of your first statement on page 23 you explain that you attended grenfell tower on the 2nd
02:30:24 tower on the 2nd of november 2016 at the invitation of claire
02:30:27 claire williams
02:30:30 and you say it related to an issue with the system and we agreed to meet on site on that day now is it right that the problem that had been identified was that the smoke control system was
02:30:42 that the smoke control system was activating and turning the boilers off and the tma staff were then unable to turn the smoke control system off
02:30:50 off is that what you understand the problem to have been
02:30:56 no so can you explain what you understood the the issue with the system
02:31:05 system was that you were being called out to deal with
02:31:09 deal with i believe on just trying to get exactly when this was because there was a few things going on after practical
02:31:21 a few things going on after practical completion [Music]
02:31:25 [Music] issue with the existing system so this is in relation to uh the plant room um you'd probably
02:31:36 the plant room um you'd probably be aware that the new uh boiler and heating system was in the same basement as an existing system yes and there was an interface between
02:31:48 yes and there was an interface between the two of them from a bms perspective yes and they share the same safety circuit
02:32:06 [Applause] what we refer to what's being referred to in one
02:32:11 to in one four five is a walk we've done about
02:32:16 inspections and maintenance that needed to be carried out
02:32:22 so i probably haven't uh so sorry i see i'm getting i'm getting a little bit lost here yes i do apologize let's look over the page at what you say at paragraph 146 of your first statement
02:32:35 paragraph 146 of your first statement um so you say you say that during this site visit this might help you remember the visit during the site visit with claire williams i mentioned to her that it was important to set up a maintenance log and use people who
02:32:47 maintenance log and use people who understood the plant and equipment this involved regular sometimes daily physical checks of the equipment and the display panels to see if anything was out of the ordinary i formed the impression that the tmo
02:32:58 i formed the impression that the tmo would get these checks done by their on-site caretaker rather than by their external maintenance contractor engine ng okay um do you remember saying to miss williams
02:33:11 do you remember saying to miss williams that it was important to set up a maintenance log i do
02:33:17 log i do remember discussions with claire williams i do remember walking about the site with claire williams going through bits and bobs shall we say elements components of the system
02:33:28 components of the system not a comprehensive walk or inspection and just giving some advice that they should be
02:33:34 should be engaging as specialists in smoke control systems to be maintaining and looking after the equipment and the
02:33:45 and looking after the equipment and the system
02:33:47 and what was the reaction when you explained that
02:33:56 as i'm saying here i got the impression that it would be done by their on-site guys that's me not knowing whether they're uns unsight their on-site guys may be
02:34:09 unsight their on-site guys may be competent to do that right i don't know but i got the impression that their existing team would be dealing with it right i see and did you ever then tell any of the
02:34:20 and did you ever then tell any of the caretakers as you've called them there um what checks would need to be done that wouldn't be my job to do that nor would i be
02:34:33 to do that nor would i be qualified and experienced enough to go to the level of detail of providing a test inspection maintenance regime for
02:34:45 test inspection maintenance regime for the smoke control system that that would not be my area of expertise
02:34:49 expertise yes i see now mr hughes david hughes of ryden
02:34:55 ryden um and this for the transcript the reference for this is at paragraph 112 of his statement on page 24 of that ryd3094213
02:35:07 of that ryd3094213 mr hughes says that on the 2nd of november on this occasion that he and you gave a demonstration of the smoke control system to somebody called paul stedman who was the tmo estate
02:35:20 paul stedman who was the tmo estate services caretaker do you remember meeting a mr stedman on this occasion and giving him the illustration the name
02:35:31 the illustration the name i don't recall um to be honest past the demonstration with building control
02:35:44 the demonstration with building control i don't recall any further demonstrations being carried out i see so when you were with claire williams on the 2nd of november
02:35:55 the 2nd of november do you remember meeting um any of the caretakers or people known as the estate services caretakers for the tmo and explaining to them how the system worked
02:36:06 worked it was possible right i can't recall at the moment i specifically remember walking around with claire and dave um i can't specifically remember
02:36:18 um i can't specifically remember meeting with um
02:36:25 claire's or the um the maintenance time fella
02:36:28 fella right and you don't remember um the purpose of the demonstration at least in part being to show mr stedman how to test the system regularly
02:36:39 system regularly sorry could you repeat that question do you remember the purpose of the demonstration at least in part to have been to show mr stedman how to test the system regularly
02:37:01 i'm struggling to answer that question um
02:37:07 i don't believe i would have gotten involved with
02:37:15 showing someone how to test a system that i wouldn't know how to comprehensively test myself i see
02:37:31 yes i mean mr hughes says that the reason for this was that paul stedman would be doing a weekly and monthly inspection and test of the system to ensure it was working and that's why
02:37:42 to ensure it was working and that's why he
02:37:42 he and you demonstrated the system to him two separate things though in my in my mind there's two separate things there
02:37:51 there showing someone yeah i think what you're saying is you did demonstrate the system but you didn't show him what tests he should be doing on a regular basis is that correct um although i don't recall this
02:38:04 um although i don't recall this further demonstration to another party it's
02:38:07 it's likely that it occurred but the purpose of that wouldn't be to showing someone how to test maintain yes or look after the system in any way it would have been
02:38:18 it would have been this is how the system works as a demonstration yes and just another point that arises in mr stedman's evidence in his statement
02:38:29 statement this is paragraph 23 page 4 of his statement
02:38:33 statement he says he can't remember who gave him the training about the system that's how he describes it but he says he does remember asking whether it was necessary to check the system on every floor and being told it was not as any issues
02:38:46 and being told it was not as any issues would show up on the ground floor do you remember saying anything like that to um mr stedman during that demonstration i had
02:38:56 had as i've said i can't remember the demonstration occurring um that doesn't any advice like that i wouldn't have been able to
02:39:07 like that i wouldn't have been able to have given right quite confidently say i didn't give
02:39:11 give any advice it is oral evidence to the inquiry
02:39:16 inquiry paul stedman said that the man who ran the training was something he thinks was from j.s
02:39:20 from j.s wright and he said told him that he didn't need to check the system on every floor and that he could check the system by running it for 30 seconds again does that help do you remember
02:39:31 again does that help do you remember saying anything like that to mr stedman during that demonstration i can't recall well i think what you said is you don't remember giving a demonstration to a mr
02:39:43 remember giving a demonstration to a mr stedman at all is that right that's what i'm saying yeah so yes when you're asking these questions
02:39:50 questions you know i can't remember the event what i'm saying is i'm quite confident i wouldn't be giving advice on how to test maintain or check the system
02:40:01 to test maintain or check the system for faults or problems because i wouldn't know that i knew the fundamentals of the system how it's meant to work um two performance objectives and had an understanding of
02:40:12 understanding of the cause and effect yes thank you if we look um now at paragraph 91 of your first witness statement uh page 15
02:40:25 you say that the aov panel and i think you're describing the aav panel in the in the ground floor contained a series of basic instructions about operating the system manually on a particular floor
02:40:36 particular floor is that correct that's correct and you tell us this was required by rbkc's building control manager mr john hoban as set out in a letter from him to dave hughes's ride widen date of the second
02:40:47 hughes's ride widen date of the second of june 2016. now if we can go to an email string now
02:40:57 ryd3092074
02:41:01 and i want to start on page two [Music]
02:41:08 we can see that david hughes sends to you on the 30th of june 2016 he says hi alan please see attached a
02:41:20 he says hi alan please see attached a very basic guide to using the smoke extract system at grenfell tower this is required by building control can you please check and comment on i'd like to send it to the fire
02:41:31 on i'd like to send it to the fire brigade before the weekend a copy will also go by the main fire panel kind regards dave now do you remember being asked to check those instructions i remember that
02:41:42 check those instructions i remember that email coming over with the attachment that come with it
02:41:50 yes do you remember actually providing any comments on the draft instructions that were being sent to you i think my response was something on the lines is it looks good yeah in hindsight um what i should have
02:42:04 yeah in hindsight um what i should have done at that stage is refer it back to the specialists for comment yes on it psb but i did not do that i don't know why i didn't do that but it
02:42:15 don't know why i didn't do that but it wasn't something i did do okay yes if we go to jsw401901 at page two
02:42:30 these are the instructions as exhibited to your witness statement is that correct
02:42:36 correct yes yes basic guide how to use the system when activated and then various instructions on the left and then some identification of the dampers in tables on the right
02:42:49 tables on the right and if we look at a photograph of these instructions in situ if we go to blas 5031 page 138
02:43:02 5031 page 138 this is from dr lane's phase 1 report we can see a copy of these instructions in situ
02:43:11 in situ adjacent to the hmi panel mounting
02:43:16 we could see in this photograph that the hmi panel has been removed and then these instructions went below that is that correct that's our recall yeah
02:43:27 now if we just go back to the instructions where we can see them a bit more clearly to that js write document jsw401901
02:43:36 jsw401901 would you accept that although these instructions explain that only one floor can be manually controlled at a time by using the yellow smoked extract key switch in the lobby they
02:43:48 extract key switch in the lobby they don't say that a user must turn off the key on one floor before they can then operate another floor
02:43:57 that doesn't cider yeah and
02:44:11 if we go to um blas 5031 at page 143
02:44:29 this is dr lane's report we can see a photograph of the individual floor control screen at the top of a figure j78
02:44:42 now that so that is the override screen that provides access to an individual floor
02:44:47 floor control screen do you see that there i do
02:44:52 do and can we agree that the instructions don't say what would happen on this screen if a key switch was used and a user tried to press one of the buttons on the screen
02:45:05 yes i could agree with that so it's not explaining the interface and what takes precedence as between manually overriding by touching this screen
02:45:17 screen and as between using the yellow key switch in the lobbies yes i would agree with that yeah
02:45:27 now if we look um also within dr lane's report
02:45:32 report blarp2 5035 at page 287
02:45:46 in this part of her report dr lanez analyzed the operation of the hmi panel and compared it with the instructions that were provided and she notes at paragraph 7 10
02:45:57 and she notes at paragraph 7 10 14.
02:46:00 so she says she notes that if a user inserted the key at the hmi panel and turn the system from auto to on these three options appear as shown in that figure
02:46:13 in that figure and one difficulty she identifies is that the instructions don't indicate what each of these three options actually do and if we go to paragraph 7 10 17 on
02:46:25 and if we go to paragraph 7 10 17 on page 288
02:46:32 she says at the top of that page if we just zoom in to that very top paragraph the instructions state that only one floor can be manually controlled at any one time
02:46:41 one time however they do not make clear the more complex requirements which were that a user had to turn off the yellow key switch at the floor of operation
02:46:49 operation before another yellow key switch could be operated to change the floor of operation
02:46:54 operation i think that's actually the same point i was putting to you before but you can now see it with reference to this and that the system will the instructions don't explain that the yellow floor
02:47:05 don't explain that the yellow floor override switches do take preference over any manual control from the hmi panel i think you've admitted that we've accepted that the instructions didn't
02:47:16 accepted that the instructions didn't deal with those complexities that's correct yeah what was it was a more um comprehensive set of instructions ever sent to building control or the fire brigade
02:47:27 building control or the fire brigade within the technical documents from uh psb uh i believe there's well there's the description of operations that are in
02:47:38 description of operations that are in there
02:47:39 there what happens when um
02:47:44 they would they were a comma a document was distributed between
02:47:53 relevant parties on the project so i would say
02:47:57 would say those who needed to see it saw it during the construction phase yeah but to your knowledge a more specific set of instructions a more detailed set of instructions wasn't ever sent to the fire brigade i wouldn't no
02:48:10 to the fire brigade i wouldn't no to my knowledge that we've got this basic
02:48:13 basic set of instructions here that dave hughes kindly put together
02:48:18 a detailed set of instructions of how the system worked was in the technical documentation
02:48:26 whether that information was shared with london fire brigade and whose responsibility it would be to do that i do not know
02:48:37 it would be to do that i do not know right yes and and dr lane also explains in this part of her report at 7 10 19 on this page in the middle of the page
02:48:48 the page she explains that if a user had turned the system off at the hmi panel and then selected restart the system this would restart the system's fans and the dampers on the
02:48:59 the system's fans and the dampers on the original
02:49:00 original fire floor where smoke had been detected first
02:49:04 first regardless of whether a manual key switch
02:49:07 switch had been activated elsewhere now was that your understanding of how the system worked no it wasn't what was your understanding then um my understanding of how the system
02:49:21 um my understanding of how the system works how is explained to me is the system would automatically activate on detection of smoke yes so good detection system that picks
02:49:32 yes so good detection system that picks up the smoke yeah it sends signals to a panel to set off
02:49:37 off a causing effect yes um that would then be
02:49:42 be that if the system was working in environmental mode those dampers would shut yes i'm going to stop you there mr white i i understand that okay
02:49:53 i understand that okay so let's go through it in stages smoke is detected yes and that floor opens and everything else closes yes let's assume now that a fireman operates
02:50:04 let's assume now that a fireman operates a yellow
02:50:05 a yellow key switch on a different floor so the fire started on floor four say but the the fireman uses his key switch
02:50:13 switch my on floor six say yeah yes okay um the way the system's designed to work is that then the system should move to extracting smoke from that floor
02:50:25 extracting smoke from that floor shouldn't it instead my understanding of how that works for that to even be able to occur someone has to go to the main panel
02:50:35 panel and insert a key yes and turn it to on i believe yes it was and at that point
02:50:42 point um someone could then go up and use the function that function was described of me as a aid for firefighters
02:50:53 as a aid for firefighters after a fire had been extinguished to clear residual smoke from other areas of the building yes yeah yes um my understanding of the use of that key
02:51:06 of the use of that key is if smoke was still detected somewhere else
02:51:10 else that would take precedence
02:51:14 that was my understanding i see so you understood that even if they'd manually overridden the system to choose a different floor the system would then still prefer
02:51:26 would then still prefer a floor where smoke was detected again that was my understanding so for instance if you went and pressed reset it would reset the system if smoke was still in the area it would detect that was
02:51:36 was my understanding of how it worked and that would yes yes and i think what dr lane's explaining is that if there'd been an override by the fire
02:51:47 if there'd been an override by the fire brigade and you're right that would mean changing something at the hmi panel first and then going to the yellow key switch
02:51:55 switch if that had happened but then someone had in
02:51:58 had in the hmi panel turned it from um i think it's on to auto
02:52:12 at that point it would revert to operating on the floor of original detection of smoke not the floor that had been overridden
02:52:24 not the floor that had been overridden and and i just want to check whether you understood that i didn't understand no no
02:52:32 now um you tell us that you're in your witness statement the js wright issued its practical completion letter to ryden on the 18th of july 2016.
02:52:44 and you tell us at paragraph one two one of your statement that from that point onwards
02:52:49 onwards the tma were responsible for the ongoing inspection maintenance and testing of the system is that correct
02:52:58 yes and mr hughes tells us in his witness statement that j s wright was responsible for the maintenance and servicing of all the m e systems
02:53:07 systems for the duration of a 12-month defect liability period which ran to the 4th of july
02:53:13 july 2017 and he tells us that that position was reached after a discussion between steve blake of ryden and paul featherston a director of jsright
02:53:23 jsright that's not my understanding what's your understanding then um quite clearly in all the documentation that js wright submitted to writings in form
02:53:35 js wright submitted to writings in form of
02:53:37 of practical completion um certificates for various parts it states that js wright would react to issues but
02:53:48 would react to issues but couldn't have wouldn't or i don't think i'm just confusing myself here when we're talking about the practical completions we say uh maintenance is now down to
02:54:02 we say uh maintenance is now down to other parties yes um when it actually come to our contractual obligations for that
02:54:10 that it was there was some contention there um
02:54:14 um but our understanding of what we was to do
02:54:18 do was reactive maintenance so therefore if something occurred like radio was leaking we'd send someone to site
02:54:27 to site to investigate and repair yes as far as plan preventive maintenance js right at the time didn't have facility to provide that yes service um
02:54:40 actually that's helpful thank you and if we look at paragraph 190 of your statement at page 31
02:54:52 you you say that you've seen a copy of an inspection and servicing certificate issued by
02:54:57 issued by applied protection i think that should be allied protection um yes dated the 17th of january 2017 stating that the aovs had been serviced
02:55:09 stating that the aovs had been serviced it also states that cause and effects have been tested and then you say i'm not aware of any communication sent to just write after that visit to indicate that there was any problem with the aov system
02:55:21 with the aov system except for an email received in june 2017 from dave hughes of ryden and that email was about the environmental system not working do you remember that i do
02:55:33 not working do you remember that i do yes yes
02:55:34 yes yes and for the transcript that's at
02:55:38 jsw304942 i don't think we need to turn it up
02:55:41 it up so what was being reported by mr hughes was that the environmental mode of the system wasn't working it was not operating on any floor and um you were being asked to
02:55:55 and um you were being asked to investigate and remedy
02:55:59 now i just want to look at paragraph 32 of your second witness statement on page 5 jsw 407201 here
02:56:12 5 jsw 407201 here you're explaining i think the interrelationship between the smoke control system and the environmental system and its functions you you say at 32 the smoke control
02:56:23 you you say at 32 the smoke control system was activated in a different way this was primarily via the smoke the lobby smoke detectors and the control elements supplied by psb the signals to operate the system in
02:56:34 the signals to operate the system in smoke mode were separate to the environmental function when smoke mode was activated this took priority over the environmental function and the signals to operate the system in smoke mode were separate
02:56:46 smoke mode were separate separate to the building management system
02:56:49 system my understanding was that the only interface via the building management system
02:56:53 system when the system was operating in smoke mode was to close down the gas supply via the gas solenoid valve yes so you're explaining that the two systems
02:57:04 effectively have different functions and work independently but there's that one interface with the building management system is that correct
02:57:15 um in effect yes yes now can you answer this question if the environmental system was not operating as was reported before the fire would
02:57:27 as was reported before the fire would you have expected that to have affected its ability to perform in smoke control mode
02:57:40 if the system as a whole wasn't working
02:57:48 yes
02:57:53 and in terms of um the issue that was reported
02:57:57 reported um in june 2017 about the environmental part of the system let's just look at what you say at paragraphs 196-198 of your statement your first statement on page 33.
02:58:15 you say an environment at 196 an environmental made the aiv system activated when preset temperature settings had been reached i believe the activation temperature was
02:58:26 i believe the activation temperature was set at 25 degrees celsius based on an average of the temperatures recorded at five senses within grenfell tower therefore unless the external temperature reached that preset temperature the environmental system
02:58:37 temperature the environmental system would not activate and the dampers would not open
02:58:40 not open and then you say i can only speculate but based on the nature of the defect and the evidence provided by the photographs i would suggest that the internal temperature had not reached 25 degrees celsius and therefore the environmental system had
02:58:52 therefore the environmental system had not activated and then you say i don't know whether the first of june 2017 was a hot day but it's possible that it was and someone expected the environmental system to be operating but no matter how hot people
02:59:04 operating but no matter how hot people may have felt the system could not and would not
02:59:07 would not have activated until the internal temperature was at or above the preset operational temperature so there you're saying based on what you saw about this defect with the environmental system you
02:59:18 defect with the environmental system you think it's possible that it wasn't working because the internal temperature had not reached 25 degrees celsius is that correct that is correct and since i've made this statement and
02:59:30 since i've made this statement and having a look at various documents there was another um sensor
02:59:36 um sensor external to the building as well and if the external temperatures reached a preset
02:59:43 preset temperature the system wouldn't have activated either the idea of being there that you don't want to pull hot air on a summer's day into a building compounding the
02:59:55 compounding the issue of overheating corridor spaces
03:00:01 yes yeah and and if if you're right about all of that um would that be likely to have had any impact on the system operating correctly in smoke control mode
03:00:13 correctly in smoke control mode no no
03:00:17 now finally i just are going into a new topic ms grange yes um sorry i was just going to mention this i literally have one more document i want to take mr white to
03:00:27 white to and a couple of questions and then i finished my pre-prepared questions so um so we can call that 10 minutes minimum can we no i don't think it's even going to be anything like that i'm not sure if it's
03:00:38 anything like that i'm not sure if it's even going to be five minutes i think it's going to be two minutes right well mr white we normally stop for a break at this time of day because it's good to have some lunch but i imagine you'd like to complete your evidence
03:00:50 you'd like to complete your evidence this side of lunch even if it means sitting a bit longer would you that would suit me if it does everyone else i thought it might yes um there will have to be another delay when miss grange reaches
03:01:02 another delay when miss grange reaches the end of her questions for reasons i'll explain when we get there but if you think it's only going to be five or ten minutes i think we should carry on having to do that
03:01:13 yes all right the strange carry on yes and can we just go to psb 50166
03:01:29 this is a letter dated the 12th of june to js wright from whit and sun that this is effectively from psb because whit is their parent company
03:01:41 because whit is their parent company to anthony wilmot on the 12th of june providing at mr wilmot's request a quote for psb to attend for a one-off visit and um we can see from the emails that
03:01:53 and um we can see from the emails that this quote was sent to you on the 12th of june to ask how you wanted to proceed that emails at ryd zeros
03:02:04 and my questions are do you recall receiving this quote for a one-off visit yes and what did you do with it what action did you take when you received the quote
03:02:16 you received the quote sent it over to our aftercare guys yes um can i briefly explain something yes of course okay um psb
03:02:27 something yes of course okay um psb finish their works as we've seen on on paperwork when i signed off a what is a practical completion document yeah um how prac just writes practical completion
03:02:38 completion was it a later date yes what that give is a band
03:02:41 is a band from the end of psb's defect liability and the end of jazz rights
03:02:50 defect was reported to get psb the expert specialist down to site
03:02:58 site a purchase order needs to be raid raised i thought the best way to do that trying to assist jazz right aftercare was send
03:03:09 assist jazz right aftercare was send them down there to do a maintenance a six monthly maintenance visit
03:03:14 visit to actually go through the system to see if there is any issues at all
03:03:20 that was the idea behind this i see and what and what happened forgive my interruption but um you say this was a proposal for a one-off sorry
03:03:31 one-off sorry yes i i realized that i think that's a mistake in my notes so it says well this looks as though it's it's proposals for the preventive maintenance contract exactly yes sorry i apologize and then he says
03:03:43 yes sorry i apologize and then he says um so that that's a quote for a maintenance contract by psb so that's what you've just explained yeah and there was further correspondence about this where this was for a year
03:03:54 about this where this was for a year two visits we only needed one visit so we'd ask
03:03:57 we'd ask the question or i believe jazz right asked a question in psp would it be as simple as dividing the cost in half to have one visit right which would cover the project for
03:04:08 right which would cover the project for six months taking it past the defect liability period for our liability to respond to a defect yes not for plan preventive maintenance yes yeah and as far as you
03:04:19 yes yeah and as far as you can said you passed this quote on did you to
03:04:22 you to to who can you remember uh it would have been
03:04:27 two dsm adams i'm not entirely sure if it was addressed to me i think i'd instigated this um quote being um generated
03:04:40 this um quote being um generated and then suggested that it could be slashed in half i'm not entirely sure
03:04:46 i do know that jazz right aftercare that would have been following us through and actually raising the poster purchase order for this right yes would have been copied in cc'd and okay one's taking action
03:04:58 and okay one's taking action and you can't help what happened thereafter i mean it's not very long before the fire um very close to the fire but you don't you don't know what happened to this i don't
03:05:10 to this i don't no i don't mr chairman thank you i've come to the end of my pre-prepared questions right thank you very much
03:05:18 very much mr white as i indicated when council gets the end of her questions i'm afraid it's not
03:05:23 it's not quite the end of the ordeal because we have to have a short break to enable her just to check that nothing's gone adrift and also to allow others who are not present in the room but are following the proceedings
03:05:34 the proceedings to suggest further questions that perhaps we ought to ask you so we're going to break now i'm going to say is 10 minutes long enough in this range 10 minutes 10 minutes is fine right yes
03:05:46 10 minutes 10 minutes is fine right yes we'll break down to a quarter past one then you come we'll get you back then and we'll see if there are any more questions for you thank you all right so would you like to give the usher please cheers
03:06:03 all right 1 15. thank you
03:15:24 would you ask mr white to come back in
03:15:32 please
03:15:37 right mr white well we'll see if there are any more questions for you thank you yes
03:15:41 yes strange yes no mr chairman no further questions
03:15:44 questions um and thank you very much for letting me sit into the lunch break i really appreciate it and i'd like to thank mr white for coming and helping us this morning it's really appreciated thank you yes and i should thank you very much mr white on behalf of
03:15:56 very much mr white on behalf of all the members of the panel it's been really useful to hear what you have to say and i'm sure it's been inconvenient to you to come and spend the morning here but it's been of great help to us so thank you very much
03:16:07 great help to us so thank you very much thank you and now it is the time to go all right so you go with the usher thank you thank you
03:16:25 well now miss grange that's time to break i'm sure it is and and those are all the witnesses we have today it's just one um so we have the afternoon off and then we start with some gas factual witnesses on
03:16:37 start with some gas factual witnesses on monday
03:16:38 monday right thank you very much well afternoon off really means an afternoon opportunity to do some other work from there i think we're all quite busy on the inquiry thank you very much indeed we'll we'll break at that point
03:16:50 indeed we'll we'll break at that point and resume at 10 o'clock on monday morning thank you good thank you very
03:16:56 much
03:17:05 you