Evidence from Panel Systems Ltd (cladding subcontractor) and Arconic presentation about ACM panels used on Grenfell Tower.
00:00:07 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing uh as usual i'm joined by my fellow panel members mr stefan and mr agbor good morning morning good morning
00:00:21 good morning morning good morning before we begin today's evidence perhaps i should just say something briefly about
00:00:27 about what happened at the end of the afternoon yesterday i apologize for the fact that unfortunately we lost uh the live stream connectivity right at the end of the afternoon
00:00:39 the end of the afternoon i understand from the technical uh support people that their broadband connection was lost at that point somewhere outside their building
00:00:50 somewhere outside their building it was therefore something over which neither they nor we obviously had any control a lot of efforts were made to re-establish the connection but unfortunately
00:01:01 unfortunately it couldn't be done within a reasonable time
00:01:05 time no other facilities were lost and therefore communications with the inquiries council uh were maintained as normal um because there was only one
00:01:18 as normal um because there was only one additional question which council needed to put to the witness we decided that we would put them put the question and have his answer recorded in the usual way and
00:01:31 answer recorded in the usual way and that recording should be added to the rest of the hearing
00:01:35 hearing record for yesterday so nothing has been lost
00:01:39 lost um that's what we did and as far as i'm aware that is now available to anyone who wishes to view it but i'm sorry about that as you
00:01:51 view it but i'm sorry about that as you can tell it was something completely outside
00:01:53 outside our control or that of our technical support team
00:01:59 having explained that we can now move to meet today's witness who is mr christopher iberson of panel systems
00:02:10 christopher iberson of panel systems and i'm going to check first that mr iberson is there and can hear and see me good morning mr ibbetson are you there yes good morning good morning um
00:02:22 yes good morning good morning um you should have on the screen in front of you a copy of the affirmation which i understand that you're willing to make is that right i do very good could i ask you then to make
00:02:34 very good could i ask you then to make the affirmation by reading the words on the screen i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give
00:02:45 that the evidence i shall give shall we the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much um before we go any further there are one or two um
00:02:57 or two um matters that we need just to check on first of all can i ask you to confirm please that you're alone in the room from which we're giving evidence yes i am thank you can you confirm that you have no documents or other materials
00:03:10 you have no documents or other materials with you
00:03:11 with you yes and can you confirm that your mobile phone is in another room and that you don't have any other electronic device in the room with you which is capable of receiving messages yes very good thank you very much now
00:03:24 yes very good thank you very much now then um
00:03:25 then um just for your information you may like to know that your legal representatives are
00:03:29 are with us in the virtual hearing room in the sense that they can see and hear what is going on it is possible for them to intervene if they consider it essential to do so but we have other
00:03:41 essential to do so but we have other arrangements for them to contact our council so i asked them to keep their microphones and cameras switched off to avoid any technical difficulties
00:03:53 technical difficulties um i hope we shouldn't have any technical difficulties today you'll never quite never be quite sure but i hope we shot but if we do we'll take a short break and while they're ironed out by the technical team
00:04:05 technical team um we shall have a break during the morning
00:04:09 morning around about quarter past 11 but if you need any additional break at any time will you just indicate that and we'll do our best to accommodate you okay um is there anything that you would like
00:04:22 um is there anything that you would like to ask me or raise before we start taking your evidence
00:04:26 evidence no right thank you very much well in that case i'm going to invite this page to put some questions to you yes mr strange when you're ready thank you mr chairman and members of the panel
00:04:37 you mr chairman and members of the panel mr evanson good morning and thank you for attending the inquiry it's very much appreciated can i confirm first that you can see and hear me
00:04:45 hear me yes if you have any difficulty understanding anything i'm asking you in the course of the questions then please do ask me to repeat the question or put it in a different way
00:04:56 question or put it in a different way if you feel you need a break at any time then please do let us know can you try and keep your voice up so that the transcribers were recording your evidence can hear you and also please don't just nod or shake
00:05:07 and also please don't just nod or shake your head as that doesn't get recorded on the transcript you've made a witness statement for the inquiry i want to take you to that first if we could please go to pan6020
00:05:27 this is your witness statement and if we can go on and look at page seven please
00:05:33 we can see just dated the 6th of august 2019
00:05:38 2019 and is that your signature yes have you read this statement recently yes can you confirm that the contents of this statement are true yes you also gave a statement to the
00:05:49 yes you also gave a statement to the metropolitan police if you can go to that please at net3040321
00:05:58 looking on that first page we can see that it's stated the 22nd of august 2017 is that your electronic signature
00:06:08 i can't see any signature on there but in the in the box it says signature cm right yes have you read this statement recently no
00:06:19 have you read this statement recently no right um can you confirm that the contents of that statement are true yes have you discussed the contents of these statements or the evidence that you're going to give to the inquiry with
00:06:30 you're going to give to the inquiry with anyone before coming here today
00:06:33 other than council no thank you i'm going to start by asking you some questions about your background and experience and qualifications i'm
00:06:44 and experience and qualifications i'm then going to ask you some questions about training of employees at panel systems
00:06:48 systems and the way in which panel systems products were sold and marketed finally i'm going to turn to some questions about the selection of products
00:06:56 products for use in the grenfell grenfell tower refurbishment now between 2015 and 2017 you were the managing director and owner
00:07:08 you were the managing director and owner of panel systems is that correct yes and it's correct that in 2015 panel systems was a manufacturer and supplier
00:07:17 supplier of composite panels to a range of industries including the construction and off-site fabrication industry is that right yes
00:07:28 can we please turn to bafblas604 at page 35.
00:07:38 this is the phase one report of dr barbara lane it will be coming up in just a moment i'm going to ask you some more detailed questions about the products that were
00:07:49 questions about the products that were used in the grenfell tower refurbishment later on but i just want us to get our bearings first if we can look at that figure figure 4.22
00:08:01 4.22 we can see from the figure title that this is a photograph of the refurbished grenfell tower the window arrangement has been highlighted by dr lane and the components annotated
00:08:14 components annotated starting at the top of that photograph we can see that dr lane has identified the kitchen window insert insulating core panels those are identified by a yellow outline
00:08:26 those are identified by a yellow outline and yellow hatching on each level these were the window intro panels that house the kitchen window extract fan and they are white in colour those
00:08:37 and they are white in colour those panels were manufactured and supplied by panel systems is that correct i can't i have never seen the drawing um i i guess we did supply them but i
00:08:50 um i i guess we did supply them but i can't
00:08:50 can't specifically say where on the buildings went
00:08:54 went and thank you and we can see that dr lane has
00:08:58 lane has identified the new window frames which are ident
00:09:02 are ident outlined in blue and the glazing which is outlined in red with red hatching
00:09:10 hatching dr lane is then identified in the line at the bottom of the photograph insulating core panels and she's identified those panels by pink outline and pink hatching
00:09:22 pink outline and pink hatching and these in full panels were fitted between the glazed panels and again identifiable by their white color those panels were manufactured and
00:09:34 those panels were manufactured and supplied by panel systems is that correct again i can only confirm that we supplied the panels uh i have no idea where they went on a building other than what i'm being told
00:09:46 building other than what i'm being told here
00:09:46 here but i don't doubt that that is correct and i'm right that panel systems is able to manufacture uh composite panels with a range of
00:09:57 uh composite panels with a range of materials
00:09:59 materials yes it offers for example metal plastic fiberglass and timber facing options
00:10:06 options yes and various core materials such as phenolic foam mineral wool extra extruded polystyrene styrofoam for example yes so that we
00:10:18 styrofoam for example yes so that we have an idea is it correct that typically the core material is bonded to the facing material using a form of adhesive yes
00:10:30 in 2015 uh what did your role as owner and managing director of the company involved
00:10:40 the strategic direction of the business i was actively involved in growing the business i wasn't involved in day-to-day sales decisions but it's my business and therefore
00:10:51 but it's my business and therefore it's my responsibility did you at the time have any training or education in respect of the fire performance of materials
00:11:03 how big was the company in 2015 measured in what terms a number of employees for example 72 and were they all operating
00:11:15 72 and were they all operating from one central office no it's spread across
00:11:18 across three sides and where are those sites they're all within the sheffield postal region
00:11:26 region i see thank you in respect of your construction industry customers would you or any panel systems employees ever undertake site visits
00:11:39 undertake site visits yes if invited yes in what sort of circumstances would you be invited it could be various um somebody wants us to look at a job somebody wants to query a delivery um
00:11:53 somebody wants to query a delivery um somebody's following up on a delivery i see in 2015 was panel systems registered with any regulatory body
00:12:04 registered with any regulatory body uh well we're iso registered investor people registered fsc registered
00:12:13 i'm going to ask you some questions now about the training provided to panel systems employees in 2015.
00:12:21 2015. can we please bring up the document
00:12:25 pan6029 this is the witness statement of mr roach who was a product manager at panel systems from august 2015
00:12:38 august 2015 looking on page one at the very bottom of the page question three he says and we'll need to go over the page having started in august 2015
00:12:50 having started in august 2015 i had received the following training if you can go over the page a the types of products psl manufacture b a brief insight into the manufacturing
00:13:01 b a brief insight into the manufacturing capabilities of psl c i was taught about the terminology in panel
00:13:06 panel manufacture eg rebate rate and u-values d i was given an overview of the three manufacturing divisions
00:13:16 divisions is that an accurate summary to the best of your knowledge of the training a product manager would have received in 2015
00:13:24 2015 yes given somebody that had only been with the company one month i think that would cover the training that he's had in his fund first month of employment yes i see would there be a subsequent training
00:13:38 would there be a subsequent training what sort of training would that be well it would be it'd be working alongside the sales
00:13:43 the sales manager he would go out on visits to site to customers with the sales manager uh he might visit manufacturers uh to get training there um it would
00:13:55 uh to get training there um it would evolve over a period of time thank you and if we can turn to uh
00:14:03 pan6028 on page five this is the witness statement
00:14:08 statement of miss harrison to the inquiry and she was a
00:14:12 was a sales coordinator at panel systems in 2015.
00:14:17 2015. i i think we perhaps need to go yes if we could have a look on page four please
00:14:27 uh perhaps we go up to page three
00:14:34 i'm sorry uh page two
00:14:39 thank you um looking in answer to question
00:14:42 question three she says training was provided by my team leader and other sales staff she goes on to say i have also attended training sessions
00:14:53 i have also attended training sessions on products and this would include some knowledge of fire performance of materials but not fire safety is it correct then that some technical training was provided to panel system
00:15:05 provided to panel system sales coordinators and product managers in 2015 in terms of the fire performance of the products manufactured and supplied by panel systems
00:15:16 supplied by panel systems yes and prior to 2015 fire training fire performance and materials is something that that people have learned over the years that have worked for the company they didn't
00:15:28 have worked for the company they didn't kick in in 2015. no you're saying they were trained prior to 2015. um for the avoidance of doubt i'm just trying to understand the picture as
00:15:39 just trying to understand the picture as it was
00:15:40 it was in 2015. yes as as ms harrison's put there she would have had an understanding of the five performance of specific materials
00:15:51 materials very good thank you would these employees so sales coordinators and product managers uh be trained in respect of which
00:16:01 which products panel systems considered to be class naught fire rated they would be aware of what products were uh independently tested to
00:16:12 products were uh independently tested to classo
00:16:12 classo yes
00:16:16 is it right that training was not provided in respect of the compliance of panel systems products with the building regulations
00:16:26 no or the practical guidance contained in approved document b we manufacture insulating panels we don't manufacture panels
00:16:37 don't manufacture panels that in themselves are fire rated they're not independently tested indeed i'm going to ask you some questions about that in just a moment just in terms of training alone
00:16:50 just in terms of training alone would these employees at these sales coordinators and product managers uh be trained about what class naught or class one
00:17:00 class one surface of spread of flame actually means
00:17:04 means uh yes i think they would be aware of the tests that applied to achieve class one and to the test that achieved class zero but it would be unfair to say that they
00:17:16 but it would be unfair to say that they you know would have a detailed knowledge of the
00:17:18 of the the s476 test
00:17:23 who provided that technical training sales the senior sales people the sales manager
00:17:30 manager and occasionally manufacturers of the individual materials
00:17:38 would uh manufacturers ever be invited to come
00:17:41 to come to panel systems to provide technical training to yes i see can we please turn to your witness statement
00:17:50 statement at page five that's pan6020
00:18:03 uh looking at the very top of the page and you picked up on this earlier just now in your evidence you say the fire performance of the panel is governed by the fire performance of the panel
00:18:14 performance of the panel core psl would use the fire performance as stated by the panel core manufacturer is it fair to say then that the technical training in respect to the
00:18:26 technical training in respect to the fire performance of the materials manufactured and supplied by panel systems was directed at the passing of information about the fire rating of the products as
00:18:38 about the fire rating of the products as identified by the manufacturer to for example sales coordinators and product managers yes
00:18:46 yes in simple terms yes
00:18:49 has the technical training provided by panel systems to its employees changed since 2015.
00:18:58 yes i mean i think as i say later in the statement we've we've undertaken action uh on our own testing of panels as against using that five performance
00:19:10 as against using that five performance as given by the you know the manufacturer of the core material and our employees now trained in respect to that testing uh i'm not sure what you mean by train
00:19:21 uh i'm not sure what you mean by train they understand that a panel has passed a certain fire test
00:19:27 test and clearly the more experienced understand the finer detail of that fire test but i wouldn't say that they all know precisely the full detail of individual
00:19:38 detail of individual fire tests no thank you i see um can we turn uh to your met statement please that's at
00:19:48 met3040321 and look on the second page
00:20:02 you say they're in the first substantive paragraph down in the second line our approach with a customer is driven by
00:20:13 approach with a customer is driven by their requirements and we will work closely with some on projects and in other cases the relationship will be at arm's length thus we can in some cases assist in the
00:20:24 thus we can in some cases assist in the design of a product panel and others we will simply respond to a pricing inquiry can you see that there yes so when a customer approaches panel
00:20:35 so when a customer approaches panel systems for the manufacture and supply of a composite panel panel systems
00:20:40 systems may be simply responding to a pricing inquiry
00:20:44 inquiry is that right yes or it may provide some design advice in respect of the panels
00:20:51 panels again it depends who's asking the question
00:20:54 question indeed if we could have a look at the very bottom of page one
00:21:08 and we will need to look over the page the very final sentence the composite panel will combine properties of the materials and if you can go over the page to produce a panel able to meet a
00:21:20 produce a panel able to meet a combination of performance criteria eg insulation strength aesthetic fire and impact so by design of a product then do you
00:21:32 so by design of a product then do you mean that panel systems might advise the customer on the composition of the panel required to meet the customer's performance criteria yes if if asked
00:21:47 yes if if asked can i then take you back to your witness statement to the inquiry that's a pan6020 and look on page three
00:22:02 at the bottom of the page at paragraph five
00:22:06 five paragraph 2.2 of panel systems position statement
00:22:10 statement to the inquiry is quoted and it is recorded there are several basic queries in terms of the fire performance of panels that may form part of designing the panel composition
00:22:23 part of designing the panel composition these may include a class 1 surface spread of flame b class naught to building regulations c non-combustible core
00:22:34 c non-combustible core so are you confirming here that some of the basic design queries in respect to fire performance would be whether the customer requires a class one
00:22:44 class one or class naught product or a product with a non-combustible core is that correct yes if we could turn to pan7
00:22:59 this is marketing literature produced by panel systems dated october 2014 in respect to its composite panels and i appreciate that this literature predates
00:23:10 predates uh harley's first order which we will come to later if we could please look on page four
00:23:20 there is a subheading technical specifications
00:23:25 if a customer contacted panel systems wanting advice in respect of the design of a panel would a sales coordinator or a product manager be expected to
00:23:37 a product manager be expected to look at these boxes to assist in the selection of the correct core material to meet a particular customer's performance requirements needs
00:23:48 performance requirements needs possibly
00:23:51 possibly okay it depends very much on the type of questions that have been asked okay so looking at that second box down composite panel insulation core selection data table
00:24:03 selection data table and penultimate nine reaction to fire brackets din 4102 close brackets would a sales coordinator or a product
00:24:15 would a sales coordinator or a product manager have sufficient knowledge and training to be able to advise for example as to whether a particular application required an a1 or b2
00:24:27 required an a1 or b2 rated product well you've you've changed the question you're now saying whether the application requires that um what we're talking about here is
00:24:38 um what we're talking about here is the panel itself if asked if somebody wanted a panel that is classo then we would advise whether the building needed classo is not the decision for my sales team
00:24:51 is not the decision for my sales team i see so you mentioned class naught in that final line class naught to building regs we can see that all core core materials
00:25:02 we can see that all core core materials respond
00:25:03 respond no save for the phenolic and mineral fibre lamella core materials given that it appears that both products are class naught rated
00:25:15 are class naught rated um if a customer telephoned and said could we please have a class not rated product
00:25:22 product would a sales coordinator or a product manager
00:25:25 manager be able to advise as to which core material
00:25:29 material i.e either the phenolic or the mineral fibre material uh was suitable yes by virtue of what knowledge or training would they be able to give that advice
00:25:42 would they be able to give that advice well the tables to a certain extent the training
00:25:45 training but as i said earlier individuals will have
00:25:48 have been taught and been explained uh what each of these different core materials are i see so if a customer said we need a
00:25:59 i see so if a customer said we need a class
00:26:00 class uh naught rated product would uh one of these employees be able to draw the distinction between the a1 and b2 rated products and give that advice
00:26:12 rated products and give that advice yes and if if they weren't able there wouldn't be senior people in the sales office that would work with them on that
00:26:20 who would that be there's a there's a senior a
00:26:24 senior a salesperson there's there's a product manager and there's a sales manager um they've all got different knowledge you know with many years uh experience
00:26:38 you know with many years uh experience in 2015 uh were sales coordinators trained to volunteer any information regarding the fire performance of any of panel systems products
00:26:49 of any of panel systems products what do you mean by volunteer uh well for example was there any sort of compliance checklist
00:26:57 checklist uh processed in place that a sales coordinator would go through when responding to a pricing inquiry well
00:27:05 well if again it depends very much on them pricing inquiry if if the inquiry has come through um with what we would call a bill of materials and
00:27:16 materials and performance criteria listed on there the sales estimator would look at the performance criteria and if they were able to answer the questions then then they would answer them if they were not qualified
00:27:27 not qualified or didn't know the answer they they would seek answers elsewhere within the company
00:27:33 company yes i see would they ask any questions about the intended application of the products possibly it's very diff
00:27:45 of the products possibly it's very diff there isn't a straightforward answer to every enquiry that comes into the company they're all very very different
00:28:00 we could turn to pan6017 at page two this is panel systems position statement to the inquiry
00:28:18 at paragraph 2.4 it is recorded where fire performance is not
00:28:26 not stated we would offer a panel with a styrofoam
00:28:30 styrofoam with styrofoam as the core why was a panel with a styrofoam core the default offering in the absence of a customer's indication of fire performance
00:28:41 indication of fire performance because styrofoam thermally is very efficient
00:28:45 efficient it is very good for core material because it bonds very well its compression is very good
00:28:53 good it's a close cell phone it has lots of attributes as a thermally insulating core i see was it panel systems practice to
00:29:04 i see was it panel systems practice to notify
00:29:05 notify their customers of the fire performance of styrofoam when offering it as a default uh core material
00:29:13 material no and why was that well styrofoam has been around for 40 years i
00:29:20 years i i have no reason to doubt that the market is not aware of the performance of styrofoam it's a polystyrene there's nothing um
00:29:31 there's nothing um you know there's no there's styrofoam literature in the marketplace it's a well-known product within the construction industry was it in 2015 panel systems practiced
00:29:44 was it in 2015 panel systems practiced to notify their customers that they should
00:29:46 should check the compliance of the styrofoam with the building regulations in their chosen application if it was offered as the default core material
00:29:57 material i would expect that them to do that as a matter of course i see but it wasn't um panel systems practice to notify their customers thank you
00:30:10 i'm now going to ask you some questions about how panel systems products were marketed
00:30:15 marketed if we could look at your witness statement to the inquiry please at page six that's pan601
00:30:36 you say at paragraph eight uh and i'm summarizing here that you are not aware of the guidance given in approved document b in respect to the necessary fire performance of insulating products
00:30:49 performance of insulating products for buildings above 18 meters does that mean that in 2015 panel systems marketing materials similarly made no claim in respect to their suitability for
00:31:02 in respect to their suitability for buildings
00:31:03 buildings uh with a story of above 18 meters i don't think 80 meters figures in any of our literature i see in 2015
00:31:14 i see in 2015 did panel systems marketing literature advertise the fire rating of the various core materials uh offered by panel systems
00:31:25 no panel core was offered has been suitable for over 18 meters because i think at the time we were not aware of the 18 meter issue i see yes
00:31:39 issue i see yes but can we turn back to your witness statement at page four
00:31:45 the please is needed it's pan6020 page four
00:31:53 at the very top of the page uh paragraph 2.1 of panel systems position statement is
00:31:59 is set out psl do not manufacture a panel that has been subjected to any independent fire testing the fire performance of the panel will be based on the performance of the
00:32:11 be based on the performance of the individual elements of the panel and if we could go to the bottom of the page at paragraph 6a
00:32:24 again panel systems position statement is set out um wherein the allu glaze product is referred to and described as an insulating composite panel designed with a range of
00:32:37 composite panel designed with a range of fire performances depending on the choice
00:32:39 choice of panel core and you can see there at paragraph 6a what range of fire performance can these panels be designed with is asked and over the page to page 5 you
00:32:52 is asked and over the page to page 5 you provide your answer that the fire performance of the panel is gathered governed by the fire performance of the panel core and the panel systems would use the fire performance as stated by the
00:33:04 fire performance as stated by the panel core manufacturer you explained that the panels could be supplied with a poly
00:33:10 poly isocyanurate core with a class naught rating
00:33:14 rating or with a non-combustible core of lamellar rock fiber
00:33:20 my question is in 2015 did panel systems market an alloy glazed panel with a class naught poly iso cyanurate core
00:33:31 yes there would have been a poly isoscinerate core that in itself was rated
00:33:36 rated according to the manufacturer of that core as a classo material and again at that time did ali glaze panel systems market an alley glaze panel with a non-combustible lamella
00:33:49 panel with a non-combustible lamella rock fiber core yes
00:33:55 looking further down on page 5 of paragraph 7a you explain the composition of the panel supplied by panel systems as part of the grenfell
00:34:05 grenfell tower refurbishment you explain that the majority of panels had a styrofoam core and an aluminium aluminium skin but there was a smaller supply of
00:34:17 skin but there was a smaller supply of other panels with a poly isocyanura core and one with a plywood core and at paragraph 7b you say that the panel
00:34:28 7b you say that the panel would be described to have a class 1 surface
00:34:31 surface spread of flame as a result of the aluminium
00:34:35 aluminium skins if we could turn over to page six please at paragraph d at towards the top of the page
00:34:46 d at towards the top of the page you confirm that the fire rating of the styrofoam
00:34:49 styrofoam core of the alleyways panel supplied to grenfell
00:34:52 grenfell tower had a euro class react reaction to fire classification of as class e is it correct then that panel systems marketed the products on the basis of
00:35:04 marketed the products on the basis of the fire rating of the core panel material yes styrofoam we would the panel would be classed as a as a panel with a core of class c i see
00:35:16 as a panel with a core of class c i see and would it therefore be marketed in panel systems literature as a class e fire rated panel it will be marketed as a panel with a styrofoam core which is rated as class c
00:35:33 i see and what what role if any uh did the class
00:35:37 the class one surface spread of flame have in the way
00:35:40 way in which the styrofoam cord product was marketed in the literature very little
00:35:49 can you can you explain what little relevance
00:35:52 relevance the aluminium in itself would have a class one surface spreader flame i see so with the manufacturing um sorry the marketing material made clear that the fire rating
00:36:04 material made clear that the fire rating is dependent on the core material chosen and not the facing material
00:36:10 yes
00:36:16 did that marketing uh literature make clear that the behavior of the composite product
00:36:22 product in fire would differ to the behavior inside of the core material um no why was that
00:36:33 no why was that yeah i don't i the core is is that when it comes to insulation that is the main contributor to the insulation performance of that panel
00:36:45 the insulation performance of that panel i see could we turn back to your witness statement please at page seven uh that is p a n six zeros
00:36:56 uh that is p a n six zeros two zero
00:36:59 [Music]
00:37:05 you touched on this earlier in your evidence and you say here at the very top of the page we now add to all quotes relating to panels intended for use in construction industry
00:37:16 industry irrespective of building type or height where styrofoam is included and then you explain
00:37:22 explain the class e rating and that if the customer requires a core panel with improved buyer performance that they should contact the sales office for advice
00:37:33 so do you mean there that if a pricing inquiry
00:37:37 inquiry is received for styrofoam and a quotation is sent out by panel systems that that wording would be added to the quotation yes i see and what about if a customer
00:37:49 yes i see and what about if a customer contacts panel systems for design advice and as a result of which a styrofoam is recommended would the wording be added to the quotation that is sent out then
00:38:02 quotation that is sent out then any enquiry for a construction project where the quote has styrofoam where the panel has styrofoam which is called that phrase is added
00:38:14 called that phrase is added onto the quote i see there is there a reason
00:38:17 reason why you don't go further and say that there might be restrictions imposed by the building regulations as to how styrofoam cord products are used
00:38:28 styrofoam cord products are used we're not we're not architects we have no
00:38:32 no uh input to the design um i've no i we wouldn't know all the details of the construction product we can only educate on the basis of
00:38:42 of we are quoting in this case we've given you a price for a styrofoam panel and we put that on um there isn't much more that we could do we're not architects we're not
00:38:54 we're not architects we're not professional we're not designers of a building
00:38:57 building we manufacture panels i appreciate that but is there a reason why you don't add wording to the quotation to say uh please check the building regulations as there might be restrictions as the
00:39:09 as there might be restrictions as the use of styrofoam well the architect must know that that's that that's not the role of panel systems
00:39:18 i'm now going to take you through um some documents in respect of the supply of
00:39:23 of panel systems products for use in the grenfell tower refurbishment and confirm your evidence on some of this it is right that there are two
00:39:32 are two key periods of time the first is january to june 2015 when products were supplied for use within the refurbishment at the request of harley curtain wall limited the second
00:39:45 harley curtain wall limited the second is from august to october 2015 when products were supplied for use at the request of harley facades limited so i want to start with the first period
00:39:56 so i want to start with the first period of time january to june 2015. if we could please turn to pan6012
00:40:06 you will see that this is a handwritten note dated the 19th of january 2015.
00:40:16 about half of the way down the page it reads
00:40:20 reads mark at harley curtain wall inquiry is it your understanding that this is a handwritten note of natalie harrison
00:40:31 harrison a sales coordinator at panel systems yes and that it records an inquiry made by mark stackley of harley regarding the manufacture and supply of
00:40:43 regarding the manufacture and supply of products
00:40:44 products yes now to the best of your knowledge was this the first contact made by harley regarding the manufacture and supply of products in respect of this particular project
00:40:55 this particular project yes thank you if we could please turn up pan706
00:41:04 we'll see that this is an email from mr stapley of harley to the generic panel systems email address of one of your divisions and it is dated the same day the 19th of
00:41:16 and it is dated the same day the 19th of january 2015. he says hi natalie further to our earlier telephone conversation please find attached our schedule of panels required for grenfell tower
00:41:28 panels required for grenfell tower and he then asks for pricing if we go down to page two of that document
00:41:36 we can see the handwritten schedule of mr stapley there and we can see that he has requested an aluminium faced
00:41:48 requested an aluminium faced spandrel panels uh with an overall thickness of 28 millimeters do you see that there yes yes the color finish is set out as well as the size of
00:42:01 finish is set out as well as the size of the panels and i write that the core material sort is not specified at least on this page that we can see of the
00:42:14 schedule is that right yes there is no cold material mentioned there thank you mr edwardson um i wonder if you can help me with this
00:42:25 you can help me with this uh we can see under type one it reads color finished white ral9010 matte both internally and externally
00:42:36 matte both internally and externally could you help us please um what would you interpret that internally and externally to mean that's the inside face of the panel and the outside face of the panel
00:42:48 the outside face of the panel thank you that's very helpful it would it would generally mean that the panel will be seen from both sides
00:42:55 sides it because somebody's paying for it to be powder coated it will be visible externally and visibly
00:43:01 visibly internally i see thank you if we could turn them please to
00:43:10 har409866
00:43:17 this is an email from miss harrison to mr stackley also dated the 19th of january 2015 and she attaches uh the quotation if we could please turn to that quotation
00:43:29 could please turn to that quotation at hir 409867
00:43:40 at hir 409867 we can see that the quotation is for 28 uh millimeter thick uh alu glazed panels with
00:43:49 with an aluminium skin and 25 millimeter styrofoam core can you see that there yes and if you could now turn to uh miss harrison's witness statement that's
00:44:01 miss harrison's witness statement that's at pan6028 and look on page four please
00:44:14 we could please look at the very top of the page of paragraph a miss harrison sets out i quoted for a standard psl 28 millimeter glazing panel which
00:44:25 28 millimeter glazing panel which includes styrofoam as the insulation this was fully detailed in my quote now is this an example of what you've described in the position statement
00:44:36 described in the position statement that we've looked at that where fire performance is not stated uh panel systems would offer a panel with a styrofoam as the core yes
00:44:49 and is is that because mr stackley did not specify as far as you can see a core material in his
00:44:56 his inquiry yes
00:45:01 can we now please turn to met
00:45:07 3040296 at page 15. this is a purchase order
00:45:20 at page 15. this is a purchase order sent by mr stapley to miss harrison the following day that's the 20th of january 2015 and it says under item please supply face insulated spandrel
00:45:32 please supply face insulated spandrel panels
00:45:33 panels as per attach schedule and in accordance with your quote now to the best of your knowledge uh did mr stapley query the selection of styrofoam as the core panel prior to
00:45:46 styrofoam as the core panel prior to sending
00:45:47 sending this purchase order
00:45:51 and to the best of your knowledge what about after the purchase order was sent over
00:45:56 over no
00:45:59 on the 10th of february 2015 an invoice was raised by panel systems to harley curtin wall uh for 62 panels of aluminium
00:46:10 uh for 62 panels of aluminium uh with an aluminium skin and styrofoam core
00:46:14 core we don't need to go to that but for the transcript it's at
00:46:20 met3040281 and on the same day the 10th of february 2015
00:46:26 2015 panel systems generated a dispatch note for delivery of those panels to cep architectural facades on behalf of harley and again we don't
00:46:37 on behalf of harley and again we don't need to turn to that but for the transcript it is at met three zeroes four zero two seven nine um is it correct that a number of orders
00:46:48 is it correct that a number of orders were placed in the same way between february and june 2015
00:46:53 june 2015 all for alumins skinned panels with a styrofoam core yes there were scheduled deliveries so they placed batches of orders
00:47:04 placed batches of orders against that original quote and their original order i see thank you i'm sorry to interrupt um
00:47:10 um mr everson you seem to have a little bit of trouble with your light it keeps switching off um would you like to take a moment to solve it if you can well i'm pressing a button but
00:47:26 if it's battery driven the battery's
00:47:37 all gone huh we'll see how we go anyway yes okay
00:47:41 yes okay okay yes mr age carry on thank you mr chairman
00:47:44 chairman can you please turn to your witness statement at page two that's at pan6020
00:48:02 and looking at paragraph b you were asked did panel systems provide any literature or documentation on the products supplied
00:48:12 supplied if so what uh literature documentation and
00:48:15 and when and you answered no literature was requested
00:48:19 requested there was no discussion over technical details over the telephone or in writing the quote detailed each element of the panel
00:48:27 panel so is it right that harley never asked to see any marketing material or specification details
00:48:36 details disorder i'm sorry mr evanson yes correct
00:48:40 correct and there was never any discussion between anyone at harley and anyone at panel systems to the best of your knowledge regarding the technical details of the panels
00:48:51 panels correct
00:48:54 is it is that before the order in january 2015 before hollywood not a regular customer
00:49:07 before hollywood not a regular customer there was no discussion before or during the supply up until the summer months we will come to that period of time in
00:49:19 we will come to that period of time in just a moment thank you for that mr ibbitson at paragraph c on that same page you are asked whether panel systems provided any information about the fabrication or
00:49:30 about the fabrication or installation of its products in respect of harley's order and your answer is that harley did not ask for
00:49:37 ask for any information is it correct then that panel systems to the best of your knowledge
00:49:42 knowledge were not aware of any of the fabrication work that was intended no we had we we knew nothing in terms of what
00:49:51 what subsequent work was undertaken on the panels
00:49:55 panels and at paragraph d if you just look a little further down that page
00:50:03 you are asked what information panel systems had about the proposed refurbishment of grenfell tower and your answer is that panel systems were not aware of any of the proposed plans
00:50:14 plans designs or specification relating to grenfell tower there was no knowledge of the proposed work
00:50:21 work or that it involved recladding the building is that right yes and you say at paragraph e that the only information harley provided was what was detailed in
00:50:33 harley provided was what was detailed in their
00:50:33 their inquiry is that right yes
00:50:37 and you were not informed of the height of the building no all the proposed use of the panels no and harley never volunteered any
00:50:48 no and harley never volunteered any information about the nature of the prod the project no
00:50:54 no um you are asked at paragraph h if you could just go a little further down the page please ah thank you paragraph h uh whether harley specified any fire performance
00:51:07 harley specified any fire performance criteria
00:51:08 criteria when placing its order and your answer is no is that right yes and is it right that there was never any discussion about the required fire performance of
00:51:19 about the required fire performance of the panels between panel systems and harley correct
00:51:26 to the best of your knowledge did harley ever ask for any advice on the required fire performance of these styrofoam panels no
00:51:41 if we could then turn back to har409867
00:51:54 this is the quotation sent by miss harrison to mr stapley uh which we've looked at previously just have a little look in a bit more detail and you'll see there that the total net
00:52:05 that the total net price is 38 132 pounds and the quantity of products totals 532 panels
00:52:16 totals 532 panels would you have expected given the volume of the order any further inquiries to have been made by your sales team at this point um as to the size of the
00:52:27 at this point um as to the size of the building
00:52:28 building no it's not a large order so this is a a typical order for panel systems at the time in terms of volume yes and in terms of
00:52:40 in terms of volume yes and in terms of the
00:52:40 the the the core material requested yes
00:52:50 what about the reference here to grenfell tower would you have expected the reference to a tower to cause the sales team to appreciate that these panels might be intended for use in a high-rise building
00:53:02 i don't think we would conclude that because it says grenfell tower that it is in itself in it is a tower um there are lots of jobs that we've done in the pa
00:53:12 in the pa we have done jobs in the past where the project has included the word tower that haven't been uh 18 meters i don't think we would look at that
00:53:21 at that and interpret it in any other way then that's just the name of a building i see i'm now going to move on to discuss that second period of time and that i referred to
00:53:32 period of time and that i referred to earlier
00:53:33 earlier um between august and october 2015. can we turn to har302033
00:53:47 this is an email from mr ben bailey of harley again to the generic panel systems email address dated the 24th of august 2015
00:53:58 august 2015 and he says please see schedule attached for pricing if we could have a look at that schedule please at har3020332
00:54:15 we can see here that mr bailey is requesting pricing for an aluminium skinned panel with a material core of kingspan tp10 rigid installation
00:54:28 tp10 rigid installation um as far as you are aware is this the first time that harley has requested a panel with a tp10 core yes
00:54:38 yes thank you we don't need to turn to it uh but there was a request made made by mr roach
00:54:45 mr roach of mr bailey to resize the panels in the schedule
00:54:49 schedule and send a revised schedule over which he did
00:54:52 he did and if we can turn to that revised schedule
00:54:55 schedule at har3020332
00:55:09 thank you we can see that for each of the p2
00:55:13 the p2 p3 and p4 panel specs an aluminium skinned panel with a kingspan tp10 rigid insulation core has been requested and at panel spec p5 it is a
00:55:26 and at panel spec p5 it is a ply core with tp10 i'm looking at now har3018872
00:55:42 we can see that on the 27th of august uh 2015 a quotation was provided in response to the pricing inquiry for those p2 to p5 panels if we could
00:55:55 for those p2 to p5 panels if we could just
00:55:55 just scroll down the page a little thank you
00:56:00 the reference there is to pir can you see that there yes yes was this the kingspan tp10 product
00:56:09 product so i missed that say that again and the reference there to pir was this kingspan tp10 rigid insulation product
00:56:19 product tp10 is a pir with a very thin aluminium foil
00:56:23 foil um unfortunately you can't bond to that reliably
00:56:28 reliably so we would buy uh the pir material as the core
00:56:33 the core uh and bond to that the 1.5 mil aluminium
00:56:38 aluminium i see okay if we can then turn to met3
00:56:53 this is an invoice raised on the 8th of october by panel systems to harley facades limited for those p2 to p5 panels
00:57:06 for those p2 to p5 panels so that takes us to the 8th of october 2015
00:57:10 2015 and finally if we can turn to met three zeroes four zero three zero two
00:57:22 we can see the dispatch note for the order
00:57:26 order two harley facades limited uh dated the 8th of october 2015.
00:57:35 uh so this is on 8th of october 2015 and if we could also look at met three zeros four zero two eight six
00:57:54 two eight six this is a dispatch note uh generated by panel systems for delivery of products to harley facades limited dated the 21st of october 2015 and we can see there again it's for
00:58:06 and we can see there again it's for delivery of aluminium skinned panels with a core of pir so is it correct that we have larger orders between january and june 2015 for the styrofoam cord products
00:58:20 2015 for the styrofoam cord products is that correct yes and then we have two smaller orders um between september and october core yes
00:58:33 could we please look at your witness statement at page five that's pan6020
00:58:43 and looking at the top of the page three lines down
00:58:49 you say uh there are a small number of panels supplied with the poly isocyanuric core with a class naught rating as requested by harley
00:59:01 naught rating as requested by harley are you referring here to harley's order for panels that we've looked at with the kingspan tp10 rigid insulation core yes if we could then turn please to
00:59:16 kin3011603
00:59:21 and we'll see that this is the product specification for kingspan thermopitch tp10 towards the bottom of the page under the
00:59:32 towards the bottom of the page under the subheading fire if we could please zoom in on that a little
00:59:36 a little thank you it records kingspan thermopitch tp10 and its rigid thermoset insulation claw are class 1 as defined
00:59:48 claw are class 1 as defined by the building regulations were you aware at the time that tp10 was a class
00:59:54 a class 1 rated rather than class naught rated product
00:59:59 product well class one is the surface spread of flame rather than um you know the class rating is different
01:00:06 different um tp-10
01:00:10 um tp-10 and pir um we i would have thought we we would just feel that they are a classo core material uh but tp10 we can't bond
01:00:22 core material uh but tp10 we can't bond to tp10
01:00:23 to tp10 and um that was replaced by a pir chord material from kings farm
01:00:32 um i think it's it's probably us that's assumed it's a class o they haven't asked for a class so they've asked for tb10 um i see so uh
01:00:43 um i see so uh harley didn't actually request a class naught rating no they've merely asked us to bond to tp10
01:00:51 and we have replaced the tp tp10 is a poly iso sign europe with an aluminium foil and we've replaced that with a pir with a rigid one and a half mil or two
01:01:03 with a rigid one and a half mil or two mil aluminium skin do you remember what that product was the the brand of that product it was probably a kingspan uh pir material i see but not tp10
01:01:16 material i see but not tp10 not tp10 as i say is just pir with the foil
01:01:22 i see and it was it your understanding at the time that class naught um was not a rating for surface spread of fair flame yes class o inc if your product is
01:01:35 yes class o inc if your product is classo
01:01:35 classo it would by definition also be a have a class one surface spread of flame
01:01:44 um i wonder if you could help the inquiry uh with the following could we please look at har 403866
01:02:13 this is a material specification produced by harley and it is dated the 15th of january 2015.
01:02:23 have you seen this document before no i appreciate that and i'm showing it to you now for context and background only ignoring the annotations in red ink for
01:02:35 ignoring the annotations in red ink for the moment in the left hand column in the fifth paragraph
01:02:40 paragraph down in respect of glazing p1 panels an aluminium skinned panel with a
01:02:49 with a core of tp10 rigid insulation is specified do you see that there yes yes and purely for information the p1 panel
01:02:59 panel was the window infill panel between the glazed panels and in the paragraph underneath beneath that
01:03:07 that glazing p2 panels an aluminium skinned panel with a tp10 rigid insulation core is also specified do you see that there yes yes and purely
01:03:19 do you see that there yes yes and purely again for your information p2 was the panel that housed the kitchen extract fan and looking then again at the fifth paragraph down and the annotation
01:03:31 paragraph down and the annotation in red ink in respect to the p1 panel it has been written um 25 millimeter styrofoam do you see that there yes
01:03:42 styrofoam do you see that there yes and in the paragraph below in respect to the p2 panels the annotation is as above do you see that there yes if we could then look at the document har403869
01:04:06 this is a later version of the same harley material specification document and i again i appreciate that you won't have seen this and i'm showing it to you only for background and context this has been
01:04:18 background and context this has been stamped by studio e on the 26th of january 2015 and we can see that in respect of the glazing p1 panels the specification has been
01:04:31 panels the specification has been updated to styrofoam can you see that there
01:04:34 there yes but in respect to the p2 panels the specification has been left as tp10 rigid insulation yes if we could briefly look back
01:04:47 yes if we could briefly look back at har3020332 uh we have looked at this before but it's the pricing schedule which
01:04:59 it's the pricing schedule which accompanied ben bailey's email of the 24th of
01:05:02 24th of august 2015 panel systems and we can see there that for all of the panels p2
01:05:09 panels p2 uh to p5 uh that tp the tp10 product has been requested albeit that the p5 also includes timber
01:05:22 albeit that the p5 also includes timber yes can we then please turn to blas
01:05:29 608 at page 61. this is dr lane's phase one report
01:05:53 um could we please uh go down um i'm looking figure 8.73
01:06:06 let's go down one page thank you very much
01:06:10 much picking that figure 8.73 yes is window insert insulating core panel removed from glazing system and this is the p2 panel that housed the
01:06:23 and this is the p2 panel that housed the kitchen extract fan we can see the ventilation opening there
01:06:28 there and found following her site inspections that the panels at p2 to house this extract fan had a styrofoam
01:06:38 styrofoam core rather than a pir core do you recognize this and as an aluglaze
01:06:45 aluglaze product from the photograph yes although we have not put the cut out in the panel
01:06:52 the panel yes thank you
01:06:56 and can you confirm perhaps you can help us that this is a styrofoam core rather than a pir
01:07:06 well i mean it is difficult from the photograph but given the evidence that you've presented earlier i would see it as a styrofoam panel
01:07:14 panel right but but you can't say from looking at the photograph itself well i would expect it to be a blue in color but it's the i think it's the quality of the photograph
01:07:25 it's the quality of the photograph right i see to the best of your knowledge were the pir panels ordered by harley actually delivered to site
01:07:36 site the the last uh seven or eight panels was
01:07:40 was were all delivered to sight yes can i then take you to the transcript please at day eight page
01:07:51 please at day eight page 168 at line 16.
01:08:02 this is the evidence of mr ben bailey of harley to the inquiry and he is being asked questions about the composition of this panel p2 that housed the kitchen extract fan
01:08:16 he's asked
01:08:30 i think i have to just double check my uh
01:08:33 uh transcript reference on that um i shall come back to that very shortly um i just want to ask you now
01:08:40 now a about a separate inquiry that was made um if we could please turn up har402852
01:09:07 looking at the second email in the chain uh this is an email from mr roach of panel systems to ben bailey of harley uh dated the 4th of september 2015
01:09:19 uh dated the 4th of september 2015 and mr roach says please find attached our quotation as per your specification provided along with a data sheet for the core material provided and if we
01:09:30 for the core material provided and if we could turn to the quotation please at har40
01:09:59 the reference har4028
01:10:04 that's what we got
01:10:10 oh yes uh let's try har3018876
01:10:23 [Music]
01:10:29 this is a data sheet attached to mr roach's email uh for the product europhone products limited versifier and the product is described as an a1
01:10:41 the product is described as an a1 non-combustible board and on page 2
01:10:49 we can see in the bottom section of that yellow box that the product has been tested bs 476 part 4 and rated non-combustible
01:11:00 476 part 4 and rated non-combustible and tested in accordance with bsen iso 1716
01:11:05 1716 2002 and 1182 2002 and on page three
01:11:16 we can see that on the right hand side page
01:11:19 page under the handy heading timber frame partition construction cavity fill the panel core is a 70 millimeter thick mineral wool can you see that there
01:11:32 mineral wool can you see that there yes and if we could look back at your witness statement on page five that's pan6020
01:11:44 you set out at paragraph 7a that the panels supplied to grenfell tower
01:11:52 tower were with 538 styrofoam cord panels 19 poly isocyanurate cord panels with two variations of skin thickness and one plywood cord panel
01:12:06 and one plywood cord panel are you able to confirm then that whilst harley was offered um an a1 rated mineral wool product they did not in fact order any such
01:12:17 they did not in fact order any such product
01:12:19 product that enquiry the product put forward is non-combustible but it provided no thermal properties um in fact that product was was not ordered
01:12:33 in fact that product was was not ordered we quoted it was a small number of panels
01:12:36 panels and it went no further harley did not pursue that inquiry right thank you
01:12:45 mr chairman i have only uh probably five minutes
01:12:50 minutes worth of questions left for mr ebbets and um perhaps i may continue before we break
01:12:55 break yes well mr emerson we would normally have a break about now but i think if there are only five minutes worth of questions you might prefer to be healed yes please yeah so we'll press on
01:13:06 healed yes please yeah so we'll press on please prescript thank you mr chairman if we could turn into the transcript at day 39 uh page 168.
01:13:30 you will recall that i was asking you some questions about the p2 panel that housed the kitchen extract fan and its composition whether it was a styrofoam core or a
01:13:41 styrofoam core or a pir core and this is mr ben bailey's evidence to the inquiry at line 16 uh he is asked by council to the inquiry can you account for how it comes about
01:13:53 can you account for how it comes about that the p2 panel contained a 25 millimeter layer of styrofoam
01:13:59 styrofoam as opposed to the tp-10 kingspan as stipulated or specified and mr bailey answers i don't remember having any conversations with panel systems about them changing it
01:14:10 systems about them changing it so beyond that it would be guessing that they have changed it themselves then can we have a look at page 173
01:14:24 from line three this is on the same topic
01:14:28 topic mr bailey says i think well i think from what we've seen i think the reality is that they were supplied as styrofoam core as dr lane suggested and
01:14:39 as dr lane suggested and now i just want to ask you to to the best of your knowledge and recollection was the order for pir chord panels at location p2 ever substituted
01:14:50 at location p2 ever substituted by panel systems to a product with a styrofoam core no so to the best of your knowledge uh pir quad panels were manufactured and supplied to harley
01:15:03 and supplied to harley no that wasn't the question we did not substitute styrofoam if you go back to the inquiry from harley it references p1 and p2 it does not identify any difference
01:15:15 it does not identify any difference between those two specifications and in fact the drawing that you put on also with the red annotation showed that it already been changed to styrofoam before it came to panel systems
01:15:31 in respect of the p2 panel the specification i can take you back to it if it helps the specification remained
01:15:40 remained um as a tp10 rigid insulation and so my question is is simply was that order for tp10 ever substituted
01:15:51 was that order for tp10 ever substituted by panel systems to a styrofoam core we would never change um a panel cord that a customer has asked for
01:16:03 can i just ask you mr ribbitson um you've explained that um you couldn't use tp10 as a product because of the foil facing yes but you but you could and did obtain
01:16:15 yes but you but you could and did obtain the uh the actual insulation material the phone
01:16:19 the phone plastic the pir yes was there any ever any difficulty getting hold of the pir itself no i mean i i imagine it's a fairly
01:16:30 no i mean i i imagine it's a fairly easy product to obtain isn't it from one of
01:16:33 of and we use it on a regular basis yeah all right thank you very much yes thank you mr chairman in that period of time so august to
01:16:44 in that period of time so august to october 2015 do you yourself recall seeing any order for styrofoam cord panels no
01:16:56 finally are you able to help us with what
01:17:00 what these panels with the pir core were actually
01:17:03 actually used for at grenfell tower no
01:17:10 thank you mr ibison i i've now come to the end of my questions for you i will hand back to the chairman as it would be necessary for us to have a short break uh to see if there are any further questions from elsewhere right
01:17:23 further questions from elsewhere right mr everson well that's the end of the questions that council thinks she needs to ask you we always have a short break at this point um
01:17:31 point um just so that council can check that she hasn't overlooked anything and also to enable others who are following the hearing to suggest other questions that it might be necessary to ask you so we're going to
01:17:43 necessary to ask you so we're going to break now
01:17:44 break now um and we'll resume at where are we 25 to 12 please gives us just over a quarter of an hour at that point we'll be able to tell you whether there are any more questions we
01:17:55 whether there are any more questions we have for you i probably will can i just ask you while we're
01:18:00 we're uh while we're having this break please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it thank you
01:18:08 thank you all right so we'll see you at 25's tour thanks so much
01:34:52 welcome back everyone we'll see now whether there are any further questions for mr hibbertson i'll just check that mr iberson can hear and see us all yes very clear very good thank you very
01:35:03 yes very clear very good thank you very much well we'll see if council has any more questions for you yes mr strage thank you mr chairman um i don't have any other questions for this witness right well thank you very much well done
01:35:14 right well thank you very much well done well miss tribbettson um i can't see you at the moment yes i can
01:35:23 there we are now well mr everson no more questions for you which will no doubt come as a a good thing um so it only remains to me to thank you very much for making yourself available
01:35:34 making yourself available um i i'm sorry if you were inconvenienced yesterday because i think at one stage we were hoping to see you yesterday but we couldn't manage that so i'm sorry if that caused you
01:35:45 so i'm sorry if that caused you difficulties um anyway we have now seen you we've had the benefit of hearing your evidence for which we're very grateful
01:35:52 grateful thank you very much and that's the lot you're free to go about your business thank you very much thank you very much goodbye
01:35:59 goodbye hi well at that point we'll have a short break
01:36:04 break uh while we reorganize things so that mr millet can open some documents to us for much of the rest of the day
01:46:17 welcome back everyone at this stage where
01:46:21 where mr millet is going to show us a number of the documents that have been disclosed by our conic some of which we have seen briefly
01:46:29 briefly during the course of mr schmidt's evidence but some of which we've not yet seen at all so mr millet when you're ready we'll look forward to hearing from you thank you very much mr chairman uh mr
01:46:40 thank you very much mr chairman uh mr chairman members of the panel today we continue with the documentary evidence of our comic the manufacturer of rayner bond acm we've heard from ms debra french and
01:46:52 we've heard from ms debra french and from mr vince meakins they were the uk sales representatives for the reynobond products we have also heard evidence from mr claude schmidt he was the general manager of arconic
01:47:05 he was the general manager of arconic the iconic company based in merczheim in france known in his evidence as aap sas as the panel knows from my submissions at the start of our
01:47:16 from my submissions at the start of our conic's evidence we had invited other archonic witnesses who are located in france and germany to come to the inquiry to give oral evidence
01:47:27 give oral evidence those witnesses were claude vale head of technical
01:47:30 technical sales support peter frelich the product manager for the reynobond range at material times and gweneil derendanger who was at material times a sales
01:47:43 who was at material times a sales assistant
01:47:44 assistant uh for arconic in relation to products and she was based at merczheim and part of the inside sales team as you know those witnesses declined to
01:47:55 as you know those witnesses declined to attend to give evidence on the basis of a perceived risk of prosecution by the french authorities under the french blocking statues of 1968.
01:48:06 1968. the aim of this presentation is to place the remaining archonic documents which will need to form part of the record into the public domain and to show further key documents to you that we
01:48:18 further key documents to you that we would have looked at with those witnesses so that you can see and understand them in a coherent order it is also to set some of the documents that you have already seen
01:48:29 have already seen into their wider context it will on occasions be necessary to explain to you and to the public at large how documents relate to the inquiry's lines of investigation
01:48:41 lines of investigation that in turn will involve identifying the further lines of inquiry arising from the documents and at times what those witnesses
01:48:52 and at times what those witnesses say about them i'm not going to show you every single document that we would necessarily have put to mr verlais or to mr froelich or to mr antarche this is not a mock
01:49:05 or to mr antarche this is not a mock examination in the absence of the witness nor do i propose to make submissions on what you should make of the documents or about what if any inferences you should draw from
01:49:16 if any inferences you should draw from the documents or from the fact that the relevant witnesses have chosen not to give oral evidence all core participants will of course have the opportunity to
01:49:27 of course have the opportunity to address the panel on the documents and any inferences to be drawn from them when they come to make their closing statements and that of course includes our conic
01:49:38 our conic without introduction i turn to the first of the set of documents that we need to look at this takes us back to 1997 and the tests conducted in that year on
01:49:49 and the tests conducted in that year on a product called renault bond pe 160. we heard from the iconic witnesses about a number of documents that may or may not
01:49:58 may not show that reyna bond 55 pe could claim to be class naught under the british standards if we look first at the 1997
01:50:11 if we look first at the 1997 warrington fire tests uh you'll remember that we heard that the product called reynobond pe 160 was tested by warrington fire in 1997.
01:50:22 was tested by warrington fire in 1997. claude verle refers to those tests at page 14 of his witness statement of paragraph
01:50:27 paragraph 47. if we could have that up please that's met3053190 page 14. the paragraph 47
01:50:38 page 14. the paragraph 47 he says i also had no reason if you see that he says i also had no reason to suppose that there was a material difference in
01:50:49 that there was a material difference in fire performance between the pe panels manufactured in the us
01:50:53 the us which were tested in warrington in 1997 panels which were then known as rb160pe and those which were subsequently marketed as rb55pe
01:51:06 marketed as rb55pe that's what he says can we look at
01:51:11 bsi401757
01:51:15 this is the british standard 476 part 10. and this is the 2009 edition it stands out the principles of fire testing under bs
01:51:26 testing under bs 476 can we go to page 20 please
01:51:33 on page 20 if you look at paragraph 5.3 at the bottom of that page field of application you'll see that it says
01:51:41 says uh within the field of reaction to fire direct field of application is the application of the test results for a material
01:51:50 material or product in accordance with the details of how they were tested specifically when it goes on over the page this means that the mounting and fixing arrangement used in the test method
01:52:00 method is applied directly to the use of the material or product in in real end use conditions any variation in the physical properties or thickness of material or product in the end use
01:52:11 of material or product in the end use application or variations in the mounting and fixing arrangements should either quantitatively be either quantitatively determined through a carefully designed test program or in some cases be the subject
01:52:23 program or in some cases be the subject of an assessment or expert judgment by an expert
01:52:27 an expert i can pause there and i would also ask you to look please next at adb
01:52:35 which we have at clg 50224
01:52:42 and look at page one two two
01:52:48 this is a part of adb that we have looked at
01:52:51 looked at with some of the witnesses in module one but it's worth just reminding us about ourselves about it the paragraph 12 on the bottom left hand side of the screen you can see
01:53:03 left hand side of the screen you can see that it says
01:53:06 results of tests on proprietary materials
01:53:11 materials are frequently given in literature available from manufacturers and trade associations any reference used to substantiate the surface spread of flame rating of a material or product
01:53:22 material or product should be carefully checked to ensure that it is suitable adequate and applicable to the construction to be used small differences in detail such as thickness substrate color form fixings adhesives etc
01:53:36 color form fixings adhesives etc may significantly affect the rating and that's relevant uh to the question of whether the results of a test on one product can be applied to another product
01:53:47 be applied to another product however closely similar and also the extent to which archonic or was not aware of that or those principles can we then go back
01:53:59 or those principles can we then go back against that background to mr verle's witness statement at paragraph 74 on page 23
01:54:12 and if you look at paragraph 74 at page 23 uh he says to my knowledge there have been no substantive changes to the composition of reyno bond
01:54:24 changes to the composition of reyno bond pe
01:54:25 pe pe since 2005 save for a change to the color of the core which occurred on the 4th of may 2015 and he goes on to explain what that was
01:54:36 and he goes on to explain what that was can we next look at m e t a four zeros two nine two six
01:54:51 e t a four zeros two nine two six this is a monthly report apparently by claude verlet and we can see the date at the top it refers to october 2005. can we please look at item three towards
01:55:03 can we please look at item three towards the bottom of the screen and it says under test straight calculations stroke optimization stroke drawing strokes studies
01:55:14 drawing strokes studies under poland he says we failed the fire tests two months ago with our standard core at 64 percent of ath now we want to do
01:55:25 at 64 percent of ath now we want to do new tests with 65 of ath coming from eastman and with 68.6 of ath produced as prototype in murxheim these new tests will take place as soon
01:55:36 these new tests will take place as soon as the us
01:55:37 as the us material is coming in now we have reason to think that ath stands for alumina
01:55:46 alumina trihydrate which is a fire retardant when mr verne refers to standard core the question is whether he was referring to pe
01:55:57 to pe core there but this document invites investigation of a number of things first whether it indicates that there was a change in the recipe the chemical
01:56:08 a change in the recipe the chemical makeup
01:56:09 makeup for the standard pe core at this time october 2005 second uh what those changes were if there were any and whether they in
01:56:20 if there were any and whether they in fact occurred and to what extent third if there were any
01:56:24 any other changes in the mercsine product before 2005 uh unfortunately whether mr verde was aware of any additives in the core of rayner born pe 160
01:56:35 rayner born pe 160 which had been tested back in 1997.
01:56:41 next we go to mr southgate and his warnings about uk testing in 2006. can we go to met306498 at page 19 please
01:57:01 this is an email from colin southgate to gerard sontag at alcoa you'll recall that mr southgate was
01:57:13 you'll recall that mr southgate was deborah french's predecessor in uk sales this is dated the 26th of july 2006 and his subject is renault bond fire
01:57:24 and his subject is renault bond fire certification you can also see that it goes to others including
01:57:29 including guy scheideker and claude verlay
01:57:33 it's worth reading the email in full and forgive me for doing so gerard read telecom yesterday this is a subject that i have discussed with all concerned many times
01:57:44 concerned many times over the past two to three years but no action has been taken as far as the uk market is concerned surprise surprise double exclamation mark
01:57:54 mark now we could have a major problem that could cost aapm a lot of money in potential claims and legal costs let me try to explain the situation why i think we could be in trouble
01:58:05 i think we could be in trouble original fire testing based on rb 55 pvdf paint finish completed in march 1997 certification created under certs warner's 70707 spread of flame class 1
01:58:18 warner's 70707 spread of flame class 1 juanez
01:58:24 this certification this is now underlined in bold should have been reviewed and reassessed every five to six years so in 2002-3 a review should have taken place
01:58:35 place the lifespan of the certification is 10 years max and our current certs expire and will be invalid in march 2007.
01:58:44 2007. this certification covers only rb55 and does not cover rb55 or rb53 in poly or dg paint coatings so from march 2007 and this is again as
01:58:56 so from march 2007 and this is again as in bold
01:58:57 in bold it seems warrington fire will not stand by our warner's approval and not support in any claim situation exclamation marks aapm have used for the past six years
01:59:09 aapm have used for the past six years warner's 70707 and warner 707.08 covering all rb product range covering architectural cid and s d these approvals are shown in all of our current rb product brochures
01:59:21 current rb product brochures more exclamation marks our certifications warns one two three two three one seven and one three two six one six approval september 2003 cannot be used as updated
01:59:33 september 2003 cannot be used as updated approvals covering 70707 and 707.08 this is due to the rb product having an fr core and just pausing there we will go later
01:59:45 and just pausing there we will go later to see those uh test report so the uk and ireland we have the following fire approvals and then sets them all out underneath
01:59:57 and then sets them all out underneath and you can see there that um the first one rb55
02:00:02 one rb55 architectural pvdf finish four millimeters okay approval until march 2007 an rb 55 fr architectural pvd finish
02:00:13 an rb 55 fr architectural pvd finish three millimeters okay approval until september 2013 and then there are three products rb55 architectural dg 5000 finish and four millimeters none
02:00:26 5000 finish and four millimeters none rb 55 architectural cid dg 3000 finish four millimeters none and then the sun and display uh product none and he goes on
02:00:37 uh product none and he goes on during past six to nine months amari branches have supplied rb33 for use in european airports this have been for major advertising displays omari clients have asked for copies of fire certification
02:00:49 copies of fire certification covering rbs and dias shane in our literature three projects in heathrow gatwick paris and i think dubai are all asking for accredited fire certification amari wl customer has paid
02:01:00 certification amari wl customer has paid over 750 pounds to get rb33 approved by warns so they can obtain payment for their work this problem is now closed and gatwick accepted this approval
02:01:11 accepted this approval amari el customers are wanting our approvals
02:01:14 approvals merximer sent copies of certificates one three two three one seven and one three two six one six we do not cover rb33 pe core today i've sent copies of 70707 and
02:01:26 core today i've sent copies of 70707 and 707.08
02:01:27 707.08 to see if this will keep their clients happy if amari cannot keep them happy then they're concerned that the displays will be taken down and remade and fitted at amari's cost if this happens it could be bigger than the brush claim
02:01:38 the brush claim and allah has lived with this far search problem without really being able to help for many months i'm sure al has reported it to you i understand we do have a certification in france covering rb 33 question mark my final worry
02:01:52 rb 33 question mark my final worry is misrepresentation to the market by our distributor as aapm cannot supply a true stroke official fire certification covering rb33 and some rb55 products even though they are selling the feature
02:02:03 even though they are selling the feature as a benefit via our advertising your urgent response is requested
02:02:13 and you can see that mr verle is copied as i say now this this document raises a number of questions
02:02:20 questions uh but most important is whether mr verle himself was aware of a practice of sending out test certificates for one product in support of sales of another product
02:02:32 in support of sales of another product if that's right was he aware that there was any technical justification for doing that you can also see as i've identified that mr southgate's
02:02:43 mr southgate's opinion as reflected in this document is is first that there should have been a review of the reinerborn 1997 certificates to pe in five to six years from the issue and
02:02:54 in five to six years from the issue and that the certificate would expire within 10 years or in 10 years there is no expiry date stated on those certificates i should say but there is a wider
02:03:05 i should say but there is a wider question here about whether certificates should be reviewed after a fixed date five years or so that's ten can we then go to the response to mr southgate from mr sontag
02:03:16 southgate from mr sontag gerald sontag the next day the 27th of july 2006. this is at met3064988
02:03:33 and he says dear colin we just finished with claude our meeting concerning the update of the situation we had some months ago the request for a sign project in rb 33 the renault certification we sent was a copy of the
02:03:45 certification we sent was a copy of the rainy bond architecture warrington certificate to the omari branch and we're getting a remarks from them
02:03:50 them then we decide decided not to organize the tests just for this project around 797 for thickness times three it gives measurements of course the situation since middle june is very
02:04:02 situation since middle june is very different
02:04:03 different claude asked to mr moore from the warrington fire on july 6 all conditions to organize the tests he gets the offer from them dated july 7th the same offer that mr ian moore
02:04:13 moore sent back this morning the question was to wait the new formulation of the rb55fr
02:04:18 rb55fr coa3 and to organize all tests together with rb33
02:04:24 with rb33 and then there's uh something about the time schedule now we see here talk of the tests for rb 33
02:04:31 33 that's the signage product and fr called rb55 the architectural panels and you heard some evidence that there were indeed bs476 tests at this time in 2006 on fr
02:04:45 at this time in 2006 on fr called rb55 and we have those and you heard that from mr schmidt on day 91 at page 45 line 11 to page 46 also line
02:04:56 line 11 to page 46 also line uh 11. um we also heard that there were a number of tests done on rb 33 at that time as well and he said that at day 91 page 44 lines 5 to 25
02:05:10 and we know from the documents that there was indeed bs 476 testing on rb 33 in three diameter or measurements two millimeters three millimeters and four
02:05:21 millimeters three millimeters and four millimeters in september of that year 2006. and i'll just read those into the record the at renabon 33 two millimeter tests uh uh were at arc or
02:05:35 uh uh were at arc or at arc 50366
02:05:41 ex0401960 and there's a class naught summary report at exo40 is nine five six uh there's a rhino bond rb 33 three millimeter test report
02:05:53 rb 33 three millimeter test report test report uh under bs476 part six and seven
02:05:58 seven they are ex0401951 ex0401943 with the class summary reported arc50362 and the four millimeter rayna bond 33
02:06:11 and the four millimeter rayna bond 33 test reports to bs476 part six and seven our arc 50365
02:06:17 50365 arc 50367 and class naught summary report
02:06:21 report can be found at arc 50363 but there was no testing at this time that we've been able to see of any
02:06:33 that we've been able to see of any reynobond 55 product with a pe core under bs476 part 6 or 7. on the basis of those documents that i've read into the record and summarized
02:06:45 i've read into the record and summarized very briefly and this email lines of inquiry arise about whether there was a gap in the certification for the uk if so why that gap was
02:06:57 for the uk if so why that gap was allowed to open up why it wasn't closed with new uh tests done under bs 476 part 6 and 7 either at that stage or thereafter
02:07:09 and 7 either at that stage or thereafter what was it about the uk market that meant that these tests were not regarded as so important that they needed to be kept current and what was the position with these products being sold in europe
02:07:22 we next turn to the claimed relevance of the 1997
02:07:27 the 1997 pe 160 tests and the rb 33 tests but mr verlay says that the 1997 tests on 160 pe
02:07:39 says that the 1997 tests on 160 pe and the 2006 rb33 tests are relevant to the statement that rb55pe was class naught can we go to his witness statement
02:07:50 statement at page 9 paragraph 34.
02:08:04 and paragraph 34 if you look at the second sentence three lines down he says uh moreover i had arranged in 2006 for other rbpe
02:08:15 i had arranged in 2006 for other rbpe products to be subjected to bs 476 part 6 and 7 testing including in particular rb 334 which has the same pe core but greater p e thickness 3.4 millimeters compared to
02:08:28 e thickness 3.4 millimeters compared to three millimeters when compared with rb55 and has thinner aluminium on each side of the core a total of 0.6 millimeters as opposed to a total of one millimeter
02:08:39 as opposed to a total of one millimeter on rb 55
02:08:43 on rb 55 it he goes on to say it hence has proportionately more pe and a thinner protective skin
02:08:51 now this raises questions about whether in fact
02:08:55 in fact at the time there was any exercise done by our comic to analyze the data from the rb33 tests and extrapolate that data or from that
02:09:07 and extrapolate that data or from that data
02:09:08 data to apply it to rb55 pe core then being manufactured if there was such an exercise the next question is the basis on which that exercise was conducted
02:09:20 that exercise was conducted what methodology was was used and it also raises the question whether mr verlay himself had any data in his own hands at the time to support
02:09:32 in his own hands at the time to support the extrapolation and if not what the basis of the view set out
02:09:36 set out in this paragraph was
02:09:41 we then turn to the test supplied to the us uh
02:09:45 us uh i should draw your your attention to something we haven't seen at all which assists in us understanding whether anything could in fact be learned about rayna bond 55s or rb55s fire
02:09:56 about rayna bond 55s or rb55s fire performance from the rb 33 tests can we go to meta four zeroes one one zero four please
02:10:11 this is an email
02:10:17 nbta401104 as you can see it's an email from claude verlais
02:10:22 verlais to diane diana pereira and thomas rogers on the 30th of june 2017.
02:10:32 2017. it post dates the grenfell tower of fire mr velez
02:10:36 mr velez writes i send you as an attached document
02:10:39 document a list of all the relevant certifications we have for our products in merczheim please note the three categories product certificate with audit done by the notified body
02:10:51 notified body technical approval based on system qualification for product installation reaction to fire and the table that's attached and you
02:11:02 and the table that's attached and you can see
02:11:02 can see that there is an attachment in fact i think two attachments to this email the one we need to look at in native format is that meta401106
02:11:14 is that meta401106 please
02:11:19 this lists the tests for numerous countries
02:11:23 countries as you can see from the uh the country uh list under uh row seven pay
02:11:34 if you could see that it starts at singapore and runs down through switzerland and the uk uh listed uh are the en 13501 european classification
02:11:46 the en 13501 european classification scheme
02:11:46 scheme tests at line 68 to 82
02:11:56 you can see those uh there the europe for under europe uh and those are for rb 55
02:12:08 so there's the european tests uh and you can see the uk bs 476 tests that rose twenty one two one
02:12:17 one two one two seven if we just scroll down to those one two one to one two seven in the large green block or light green block
02:12:26 block uh and uh what you get from that uh is that they list this list test is that this list lists the tests only on fr core in 2012
02:12:37 lists the tests only on fr core in 2012 and 2016. there's no reference in this list
02:12:42 list to any bs 476 testing for the uk or in the uk for any pe product and that includes the renault 33 product or the 1997 pe 160 tests
02:12:59 and the question is why not if they were relevant
02:13:05 next we turn to the fr tests which were done to achieve class naught in 2003.
02:13:13 in 2003. i mentioned these in passing a little earlier on in september 2003 there were bs 476 part six and seven tests done
02:13:24 bs 476 part six and seven tests done on rayna bond 55 pe fr core those tests did not have a summary report issued which stated
02:13:35 stated that those results would meet class naught
02:13:38 naught but we can say from those test results that we have that the part 6 test indicated an i index of naught and the part 7 test indicated
02:13:49 indicated a class 1 performance that would appear to be within the parameters of a class naught definition and for reference purposes the bs 476
02:14:01 and for reference purposes the bs 476 part six test which is numbered one three two three one seven is at bba five six zero five three and the bs 476 part 7 test which is numbered 132316
02:14:16 476 part 7 test which is numbered 132316 is at bba 6050 so those are in a nutshell the september 2003
02:14:26 2003 fr tests which achieved class naught even though not formally classified as such we then look at the european testing and this will be very familiar to you
02:14:38 this will be very familiar to you the two tests 5a and 5b uh done in late 2004. and we've seen that from
02:14:45 from the iconic witnesses who gave evidence because of the way that the single burning item test namely en13823
02:14:56 namely en13823 is configured it requires the specimen to be fabricated as either rivet or cassette you have to have a a fixation system in order to be able to
02:15:07 a fixation system in order to be able to set the test up under the european regime we saw the results
02:15:12 results in the classification reports dated the 4th of january 2005 and just to remind you the renabon 55pe in rivet which was test
02:15:23 renabon 55pe in rivet which was test 5 or to give it its full nomenclature
02:15:29 ra05005a achieve classification b s2 d naught the rhinobond 55pe in cassette which was test 5b
02:15:40 in cassette which was test 5b or to give it its full title ra05005b was stopped after 850 seconds as the heat release rate
02:15:51 heat release rate exceeded 400 kilowatts
02:15:56 now the document references for the record again and you will have these but just to
02:16:01 just to remind you of them for test 5a that is a
02:16:06 arc50535 its accompanying classification report is that arc50358 i got the reference wrong i said five
02:16:17 i got the reference wrong i said five three five um that is that is actually correct five three five and the classification report is at arc50358 for test five b the test report
02:16:29 for test five b the test report and you'll recall we only have a test report
02:16:32 report is that arc50536 i'd like to pick up on on one point you've seen test report 5b and you'll
02:16:43 you've seen test report 5b and you'll have seen from the examination on it that there was it was a single specimen test which was terminated early and no further specimens were tested
02:16:54 and no further specimens were tested can we look at bsi 50620
02:17:01 bsi50620 this is the standard the british standard
02:17:07 standard en 13501 of 2002 which was applicable at the time of test 5b
02:17:15 5b in other words it's the british standardization of the european standard and if we go to page 15 we can see it says number of tests for classification
02:17:26 classification under section 7. and if you scroll down and look at section 7.3 a uh the procedure or part of the procedure that is
02:17:38 or part of the procedure that is required
02:17:39 required is to calculate the mean value m apostrophe of the set of results for this parameter using the minimum number of tests uh if you pause there take it from me
02:17:50 uh if you pause there take it from me that the single burning item or sbi test en138 requires a minimum of three specimens if you go on under letter b
02:18:03 if you go on under letter b it says if m apostrophe lies within the limits for an envisaged class the value m used for classification is m apostrophe
02:18:14 apostrophe and then c if an apostrophe does not lie within the limits for an envisaged class two additional tests may be carried out that's important i would emphasize that and then d
02:18:25 and then d if two additional tests are carried out the results for each parameter in these two tests shall be added to the set of results obtained in the minimum number of tests next the two extremes highest and lowest
02:18:37 next the two extremes highest and lowest for each parameter individually shall be excluded the value m used for classification shall then be calculated using the remaining set of results for each parameter
02:18:47 parameter now this section of the en13501 standard says at the end of the sbi uh three tests
02:18:55 tests uh if the mean result is not what the sponsor envisaged then they can do two further tests and exclude the highest and lowest data sets in late terms that means that if the first specimen
02:19:07 that means that if the first specimen performed unexpectedly um a client a test sponsor such as arconic
02:19:14 arconic could have carried on with another four tests removed the best and worst results and gained a classification and in that way
02:19:22 way any uh apparently rogue results could have been excluded now i'd invite you to bear in mind that this is an option open to a test sponsor if they don't get
02:19:34 open to a test sponsor if they don't get the results they expect or envisage and that's written into the standard the question looking at this standard in a little detail uh which um arises uh is why arconic
02:19:45 uh which um arises uh is why arconic didn't use this provision in the standard
02:19:47 standard carrying on testing the cassette fix variant
02:19:51 variant in order to seek the classification required
02:19:54 required if possible we next move on in time by a year to 2006 uh to pick up something i mentioned not only earlier but also with the witnesses
02:20:06 only earlier but also with the witnesses which is the 2006 renault bond fr test in rivet
02:20:10 in rivet there was a test in october 2006 where reynabond fr achieved european classification b s one d naught under
02:20:21 b s one d naught under the european regime en 3501 and the reference to that is that bba four zeros eight two eight eight
02:20:32 eight two eight eight and this uh was the fr product in rivet fix only we have been unable to find any test results for the fr product in cassette form
02:20:43 in cassette form at this time that raises the question why not uh why not particularly if the result of test b on p e non non-fr form
02:20:56 on p e non non-fr form done at the end of 2004 was thought within arconic to be a rogue
02:21:03 we then turn to the initial assessment of reyna bond by the bba this starts in 2004 and is picked up again in 2006
02:21:15 in 2004 and is picked up again in 2006 uh before the eventual classification process
02:21:18 process during 2007 leading to the classification certificate uh in january 2008. the documents show that in 2004 going
02:21:30 the documents show that in 2004 going back to the beginning of the story mr verleigh made an application for a bba certificate for rayneblant55 we have an application form
02:21:40 form dated the 9th of march 2004 which has some handwritten amendments on it and the reference for that is met 3053158
02:21:50 3053158 underscore p13 at page 122 and the date is on page one two seven there's no need to turn it up but but that is um that is in the record one can tell from that
02:22:01 from that uh that the uh one can tell otherwise that the bba then offered an arconic a contract to assess reniport 55 but to cut a longish story short it wasn't taken up at that time
02:22:13 wasn't taken up at that time the contract uh offer was it met30s 53158 underscore p13 page 137 uh and look also at what pages one four six
02:22:24 and look also at what pages one four six two one four eight and terms and conditions uh sent at page one four eight uh the effort was then renewed in 2006 by arconic in the august of that year mr verlais
02:22:36 in the august of that year mr verlais sent an application form that was very similar
02:22:39 similar to the application form uh which he did in 2004
02:22:44 in 2004 and indeed didn't in fact even update the date and the reference to that is met met3053158 underscore p13 page 166.
02:22:54 166. so it is for that reason that we have two slightly different application forms both carrying the date of 9th of march 2004.
02:23:03 2004. there's then a third application form dated february 2007 to which we will return later before we do
02:23:11 do can we look at the documents used by arconic to support their application i'd like to begin with those used to support the application form submitted in 2006
02:23:24 application form submitted in 2006 and for that we need to go to met 30s 53158
02:23:29 53158 underscore p13 at page 167
02:23:43 this is the first page of the application form application for bba assessment that's where it begins if we can go in this please on to page 173
02:23:58 we can see that this is the part of the form which sets out the available assessment calculation and test data
02:24:05 test data another section 3.1 on the left hand side of the screen it says this if suitable data is available it may significantly reduce the cost
02:24:14 the cost and duration of the contract please identify all data relevant to the product
02:24:18 product and its use being assessed the data should contain an accurate and detailed description of the samples used and should have been produced within the last three years and then you see a list of reports below
02:24:29 and then you see a list of reports below that and that includes um two types of data called avi technique and those cover under the heading in the column
02:24:42 under the heading in the column characteristic covered eg fire thermal acoustic structural durability uh it says structural and system for cassettes and then below
02:24:55 and system for cassettes and then below that
02:24:56 that structural and system for riveted the issuing organization there is cstb france paris and there are numbers set out um or at least for the
02:25:10 numbers set out um or at least for the cassette version and the dates of issue you can you can see those uh we understand that there were at least from the first reference there
02:25:22 at least from the first reference there uh
02:25:23 uh avi technique documents relating to structural and system for cassette uh it is our view uh on the documents at
02:25:34 it is our view uh on the documents at the moment that these documents were put forward as data to the bba for the technical aspects of these two systems of fixing rb55 structural but not for fire performance
02:25:49 structural but not for fire performance if you go four rows down in this document you can see it says test for fire propagation and there the characteristic covered is fire bs 476 part six
02:26:01 fire bs 476 part six and seven issuing organization warrington fire research report for identification number one three two three one six and one three two three one seven and you'll remember
02:26:14 seven and you'll remember that those are the test report numbers for the tests done on rayna bond fr chord product in 2003 and we saw those or at least mention of them earlier
02:26:25 them earlier the part 7 text test 132 316 at bba 6050 and the part 6 test 132 317
02:26:37 and the part 6 test 132 317 at bba 6053
02:26:42 what we don't see here is any reference to the january 2005 european tests test 5a for rivet or test 5b
02:26:54 tests test 5a for rivet or test 5b for cassette the question or line of investigation raised by this document is why not we then turn against this background to
02:27:06 we then turn against this background to a meeting hell in luton in march 2006
02:27:13 and this is before uh this application uh there was an internal meeting where didier scheideker who was the sales manager for arconic
02:27:24 manager for arconic visited colin southgate he was the uk sales representative at the time and they appear to be discussing uk strategy can we go please to met30s 53158
02:27:36 can we go please to met30s 53158 underscore p13 at page 162. so it's a little bit uh earlier on in this exhibit it's a document which is entitled uh
02:27:48 it's a document which is entitled uh visit report uk meeting written by didier scheideker as you can see from the top right hand corner date of visit 21st march 2006.
02:27:59 date of visit 21st march 2006. and you can see that the visit report appears to have been copied to gsc uh who is guy shy decker and claude verlet cwe
02:28:11 guy shy decker and claude verlet cwe if you scroll down please to page 164 we can look at item 5 together technical tools
02:28:18 tools under that heading there is a third bullet point bba approval and it says there we have always more and more projects coming in the public housing and private development segment
02:28:29 housing and private development segment we have here project of several ten thousand square meter in discussion it could represent in 2006 50 percent of the market means 70 to 80 000 square meters in the
02:28:40 means 70 to 80 000 square meters in the segment we have always to show the official certification from the bba action can we organize to have the bba certification based on our cassette approval by the cstb how quick which costs which
02:28:53 by the cstb how quick which costs which condition
02:28:55 condition the kh-35 is a key system on the market a real trend what are and you have to go with the page what are the conditions to have it bba approved now just pausing there
02:29:07 approved now just pausing there the question that this document presents is uh what did based on our cassette approval by the cstb mean one goes back
02:29:18 approval by the cstb mean one goes back to the previous page you can see that the phrase used there uh in that first bullet point based on our cassette uh cassette approval by the cstb
02:29:30 uh cassette approval by the cstb what did that mean did it refer to the avis
02:29:33 avis or avi technique opinions or something else
02:29:37 else if it was something else what was it further questions arise on this document was there a strategy to target the uk public housing and private
02:29:48 the uk public housing and private development sector in the uk did mr verlet think that that required bba certification or would benefit from such certification it was the driver
02:29:59 driver for arconic to reopen its plan to obtain bba approval that marketing initiative or desire you will also just have seen there at
02:30:11 you will also just have seen there at the bottom of that page in the second bullet point a reference to something called kh 35 and described as a key system on the market
02:30:19 market a real trend the question there is what is that is that a reference to a cassette system offered by arconic
02:30:30 to a cassette system offered by arconic does it follow therefore that the original plan was for the bba certificate to cover the cassette form specifically
02:30:41 there's a later meeting in 2006 in watford on the 2nd of november can we go to met30s
02:30:52 can we go to met30s 53158 underscore p14 a different exhibit of mr verles underscore p14 at page one one four
02:31:04 again you can see that it's in the format of
02:31:07 format of an alca iconic visit report the company visited as you can see from the left hand side is bba british board of agreement it's written by colin southgate at
02:31:18 it's written by colin southgate at watford
02:31:19 watford and the date of the visit is the 2nd of november
02:31:23 november 2006.
02:31:27 from copy you can see that it's sent to both guy and didier scheideker s wah who we think is serge vala
02:31:38 s wah who we think is serge vala claude verlet and others if we go down to page 115 please we can see at the bottom of that page that this report was written by mr southgate on the 6th of november 2006 so
02:31:51 southgate on the 6th of november 2006 so just a few days after the meeting at watford you can see the date in the bottom right hand corner there
02:32:01 and if you go back please to page 113 here is an email uh from colin southgate
02:32:15 here is an email uh from colin southgate on the 6th of november 2006 to people at our comic including guy scheideker and claude verlay in which he attaches a report
02:32:26 in which he attaches a report and that is this document can we then go back to the report please to page 114
02:32:39 uh and you can see uh under the first block there that it's a record uh of a meeting uh as it explains uh and uh the reason for the visit
02:32:51 the visit his exploratory call to a access situation as follows with claude verlet in attendance and the second item there is negotiate rainer bond 55 proposal
02:33:02 rainer bond 55 proposal since 22nd of august 2006 value 20 495 pounds uh i should have identified a little bit earlier or above that in the document
02:33:13 earlier or above that in the document that those present from the bba included um bob what were bob keys the business manager
02:33:21 manager john albon technical manager at jemo gregorian
02:33:26 gregorian engineering system department it's it's not clear from from the
02:33:37 it's it's not clear from from the right-hand side uh whether mr verlet attended but he may have attended by telephone and we would need to clarify that with him if you go down to the second discussed
02:33:48 if you go down to the second discussed of the discussed points
02:33:52 it says details of visit after a general discussion with bk and cs threat to stop all dealings with vba unless a satisfactory solution was found really both the above potential
02:34:03 really both the above potential approvals
02:34:04 approvals bk had arranged for the bba persons responsible for each product to be in attendance this was excellent speaking with the approval technicians rather than just sales exclamation mark
02:34:16 sales exclamation mark then if we go down to page 115
02:34:20 you can see that as a meeting b rb 55 proposal dated 23rd of august 2006 with haymarry gregoria
02:34:32 babba confirmed that they would look at the original proposal and try to reduce the cost they will use cstb
02:34:39 cstb details as a basis of validation but are concerned that uk building regulations are more demanding than french regs also enclosed with was fire regulation input
02:34:49 input this will not be needed if bba have latest certs from warrington research covering pe cores and then on the right hand side
02:34:58 hand side uh you'll see in bold uh claude vela claude possibly claude schmidt to send full certs to bba
02:35:09 now the bba appeared to have sought the latest certs from warrington research covering pe cores as you can see there
02:35:20 cores as you can see there now those can only have been fire certificates and the question or at least one question
02:35:28 question is what exactly was arconic offering to send by way of cert certificates to the vba now remember that at this point november 2006
02:35:41 that at this point november 2006 iconic had the following fire performance reports from warrington we have the rene bond 160 pe class nought summary from 1997
02:35:54 summary from 1997 arc450357 the test reports from 2003 for fr 55 fr core panel which will achieve a class naught result the class naught reports for the three
02:36:06 the class naught reports for the three thicknesses of rb33 the signage product from 14th september 2006 uh the class naught report for rayno bond 55
02:36:16 bond 55 fr core panel also from the 14th of september 2006 and of course arconic also had the results from the 2005 tests test 5a and 5b from the cstb
02:36:29 test 5a and 5b from the cstb so what was it that was going to be sent continuing with the visit report in the second paragraph
02:36:37 the author of the report goes on i have suggested that it could be better to validate the material rb rather than the whole system
02:36:48 rb rather than the whole system this way a cross connection can be put together
02:36:53 together now this raises the question about what that meant or who said it and in what context but critically why it quotes could be better
02:37:04 better to validate reino bond material rather than the whole system
02:37:12 and the next sentence this way a cross-connection can be put together in what way could a cross connection could be
02:37:20 could be put together what does that mean more broadly was there any discussion at this meeting of test 5b on pe cassette and what it showed
02:37:34 on pe cassette and what it showed was there a discussion about whether the proposed bba certificate should differentiate between rivet and cassette
02:37:42 cassette fixed variants for pe was arconic looking to get the bba to certify
02:37:50 certify the rene bond 55 panel as a product without considering the fire performance of each of the different fixing systems
02:38:02 of each of the different fixing systems rivet and cassette
02:38:05 if we go back to the report at the bottom
02:38:08 bottom it's focusing on the bottom of that page conclusion very positive meeting and hard tactics may have helped our situation rb proposal will be lower prepared to
02:38:21 rb proposal will be lower prepared to work with the cstb data aapm
02:38:26 data aapm that's iconic archonic mercsheim do need bba
02:38:29 bba for uk market
02:38:33 two questions what is meant by hard tactics
02:38:39 tactics and secondly when it says prepared to work with the cstb data what precisely is that data or was that data
02:38:51 there's then a further meeting in the uh a little bit later also at watford
02:39:00 watford uh early in the um early in the first few months of 2007 to be precise the 7th of february 2007 between arconic and and the vba also at
02:39:12 between arconic and and the vba also at watford
02:39:13 watford can we go uh please in the uh same exhibit uh bundle to page 130 this is met three zeros five three one five eight underscore p fourteen page one thirty
02:39:26 p fourteen page one thirty this is an email uh from didier scheideker to guy scheideker and claude verlay uh copied to
02:39:34 copied to serge vala and colin southgate attachment fish actions and it says uh gi claude please find attach the visit report following our discussion at the
02:39:46 report following our discussion at the bba
02:39:46 bba i remain at your disposal should you have any questions and over the page at page one three one uh we will find the attachment
02:39:58 this is a visit report rapport de visite uh of the 7th of february 2007. and in the header we can see that the visit was
02:40:10 visit was 2 bba and under the line uh you can see that the visit reason was renault bond and reynolds certification
02:40:31 and then under the heading rhino bond it says
02:40:34 says the need of the bba certification is always more and more important in more than 50 of the projects the contractors are requiring the bba approval
02:40:44 approval and especially in residential buildings which became a key market for acm we have lost orders in favor of a luca bond as we do not have this approval a luca bond is the only acm supply with
02:40:56 a luca bond is the only acm supply with this approval at the time being but it will be a real differentiation point for the coming month the bba agrees to make the certification on the product
02:41:07 on the product without to be linked to a specific system
02:41:11 system possible fixing system will simply mentioned in the certification it means we will have only one approval for all our application instead to make one approval per system
02:41:24 instead to make one approval per system if people will ask for more details we will use the specific approvals initially their quotation was on 24 000 pounds
02:41:37 their quotation was on 24 000 pounds but after negotiation cso obtained it obtained to have it for 16 500 pounds
02:41:46 and then action you can see underneath that
02:41:50 that sent our french building approvals in english called verla sent the documents of our cst bat approval claude verla
02:42:01 and other things as well and if we go down to the bottom of page 131 please we can see conclusion bba approvals are very important for the
02:42:12 bba approvals are very important for the development of the uk business it is a real point of support
02:42:17 support and recognition on the market
02:42:25 now this document uh raises uh a specific specific question or overall question which is whether there was an agreement
02:42:37 which is whether there was an agreement or an understanding or an arrangement of some kind whereby the bba
02:42:43 the bba should avoid focusing on the specific fixing system with a view to concealing the poor fire performance of the cassette system behind the better fire performance
02:42:56 behind the better fire performance of the rivet system and when i say with a view to
02:43:00 a view to i don't mean that anybody necessarily had any specific subjective intention but whether that was objectively viewed the goal
02:43:11 we we that that is the line of investigation that would need to be pursued
02:43:15 pursued even to the point of understanding people's subjective intentions and motives we then turn to the bba contract itself
02:43:27 to the bba contract itself and that's march 2007 you'll have seen this from earlier examinations the contract is dated march 2007 formally entered between
02:43:38 entered between arconic and the dba
02:43:42 and we've seen that at bba 408042
02:43:49 408042 and uh since you're familiar with it i shall just uh recite it very briefly uh it was signed on the 21st of february 2007 by arconic and by the bba on the 23rd of march 2007
02:44:03 and by the bba on the 23rd of march 2007 its terms and conditions include clauses seven a and g uh and in particular under seven a the terms and conditions required arconic to provide the bba with any test data already available now
02:44:18 with any test data already available now at that point and again to some extent repeating it we know that from the documents that over a period of time that the uh iconic provided the bs 476
02:44:29 that the uh iconic provided the bs 476 test reports for tests on fr core from 2003
02:44:34 2003 test 5a from 2005 and the 2006 european classification for the fr core
02:44:47 for the fr core we will see when we come to examine mr gregorian
02:44:50 gregorian that test 5a from late 2004 and the test report from early 2005 january 2005 was supplied to the bba upon their
02:45:01 was supplied to the bba upon their specific request in may 2007 so two months or so after the formal contract was entered into
02:45:13 uh in november 2007 a further document was provided to the bba also in support of fire performance can we go to the bba technical file please
02:45:24 please uh at bba 40804 at page 139
02:45:40 this is a classification report numbered
02:45:46 ra070182 under em13501
02:45:52 it's in the bba technical files so we know they had it and it relates as you can see from the commercial brand to rainey luxe
02:46:03 and at the bottom of the screen you can see that it's dated may 14th 2007. can we look please to page one four five
02:46:14 here we see the classification and direct field of application for this reynolds product and we can see under paragraph four point two that its classification is a1
02:46:28 let's examine a little bit more closely why it was supplied to the bba can we start please by looking at mr verle's exhibit at part 16 uh m e t 3 0 is 5 3 1 5 8 underscore p
02:46:41 m e t 3 0 is 5 3 1 5 8 underscore p 16 at page 1 3 4.
02:46:46 and at 1 3 4 i'd like to begin with the email at the bottom of that page from the bba jamo gregorian titled verlay on the 29th of november 2013 at 1343
02:47:01 claude he says we already have the reaction to fire data for the exposed face for our building regulations we also require similar data i.e testing and classification to en
02:47:13 i.e testing and classification to en 13501
02:47:14 13501 or bs 476 for the back face you may all you may be able to obtain this information from the primer manufacturer so that's the request from mr gregorian
02:47:27 so that's the request from mr gregorian if we scroll down to page 136 at the top of the page we can see the solution proposed by claude verle
02:47:38 solution proposed by claude verle uh in his email of the 5th of december 2007. hello hey moe after having checked with our paint laboratory and the different certification we have today i give you those two information
02:47:50 today i give you those two information in order to qualify the back face of our renault bond panels and he goes on one the only difference between front and back side is the thickness of the coating which is 6 microns instead of 35 microns
02:48:03 which is 6 microns instead of 35 microns so we have 14.2 grams per square meter coating weight on the back face for 42 47.2 grams per square meter on the front side
02:48:15 side and then paragraph two like you can see in the attached reaction to fire classification report number ra070182 are coated aluminium used for the skin the skins of rhinobot are
02:48:26 the skin the skins of rhinobot are classified as a1 non-combustible please let me know if you have all the required information to close our certification process
02:48:35 this seems to be how the rain and lux certificate came to be sent to the bba rainer lux is a completely different product from raynaud it's a single sheet of coated aluminium
02:48:47 it's a single sheet of coated aluminium one can read these emails but what appears to have been happening is that iconic was proposing that if the paint or coating doesn't burn on the front side
02:48:56 side then having less paint on the back side should be sufficient to allay the bba's concerns
02:49:01 concerns uh if if that's the right way of reading these documents then the technical basis of that assertion would itself invite examination
02:49:12 examination and again we can see that the reynolds certificate although i took you to it quite quickly refers to a completely different set of tests namely the european classification en1 1305
02:49:25 en1 1305 and not class naught not the bs 476 part 6 and 7. the question arises in that connection is why mr verde provided that certificate in in in particular
02:49:40 that certificate in in in particular and how it justified a claim about reyno bond achieving class naught
02:49:47 can we then turn to the bba certificate itself issued in the january of 2008 and this document is is and i'm sure this reference is now
02:49:58 is and i'm sure this reference is now familiar to you bba six zeros forty seven six zero is forty
02:50:06 seven
02:50:12 now can i start by taking you to section six on page five under the heading behavior in relation to fire
02:50:22 to fire and i want to focus first uh on section 6.5 resistance to fire and it says
02:50:33 resistance to fire and it says for resistance to fire the performance of a wall
02:50:36 of a wall incorporating the product can only be determined by tests from a suitably accredited laboratory and is not covered by this certificate now that's what the certificate says
02:50:49 now that's what the certificate says let's look and see what mr verlais says about that can we go to his statement at met3053190 paragraph 58 on page 17.
02:51:10 and he says i'll read it all so you have the full context the bba
02:51:18 the bba uh then expressed uh i'm sorry paragraph 58 the bba certificate also makes it very clear in paragraph 6.5 that in relation to resistance to fire
02:51:30 resistance to fire the performance of a wall incorporating a product
02:51:33 a product i.e the performance of an actual chatting system as opposed to a mock system under test conditions could only be determined by tests from a suitably accredited laboratory and would not be covered by the certificate brackets which related to
02:51:45 certificate brackets which related to the product and not to the method of fixing or any other feature of the system in other words the fact that the certificate explains that a pe sample
02:51:56 certificate explains that a pe sample achieved an enb classification in a particular systems test was not a guarantee that the outcome would be the same in different systems or with different fabrications
02:52:07 systems or with different fabrications as you can see he's referring specifically there to paragraph 6.5 the words in brackets there invite examination which related to the product
02:52:20 examination which related to the product and not the method of fixing or any other feature of the system but let's go back to the certificate itself
02:52:30 a page five bba 6047 page five again please
02:52:35 please uh we've been looking at paragraph or section 6.5 which is about resistance to fire so you can see if we look up to the top of the screen
02:52:48 uh paragraph 6.1 and ergo 6.2 and 6.3 relate to reaction to fire you can see on the 6.1
02:53:00 reaction to fire you can see on the 6.1 in the third line when tested for a reaction to fire also in the first line and tested for reaction to fire now the wording difference may be subtle but it is critical
02:53:13 but it is critical the results stated in 6.1 6.2 and 6.3 of the certificate pertain to reaction to fire
02:53:22 six section 6.5 is not about reaction to fire
02:53:27 fire it's about resistance to fire reaction to fire and resistance to fire are different concepts they have different test regimes and that was explained
02:53:38 that was explained in passing uh by uh dr lane in her presentation to you on day 68 at page pages 41-42 and indeed is referred to recently by mr
02:53:49 and indeed is referred to recently by mr morton his evidence on day 102.
02:53:54 if one uses the british standard 476 suite of tests you can see the scheme very clearly laid out bs476 part
02:54:05 scheme very clearly laid out bs476 part 6
02:54:06 6 and 7 are reaction to fire tests as defined in part 10 of bs 476 and i'll just give you the reference
02:54:18 476 and i'll just give you the reference to that
02:54:18 to that that's a bsi four zeros one seven five seven that that's the 2009 version the pages 17 and 18 under section five specifically section 5.2.2
02:54:31 specifically section 5.2.2 for part 6 and 5.2.3 for part 7. so that's reaction to fire for resistance to fire you need to look at a completely different part
02:54:42 completely different part of bsi 476 and that's part 20 and that's at bsi four zero is one seven four eight it does it defines resistance
02:54:53 four eight it does it defines resistance to fire
02:54:54 to fire under section 2.3 on page seven of that document
02:54:58 document as a measurement of the time for a standard temperature over time and a pressure regime without loss
02:55:05 loss of a or its fire separating function or load bearing function or both
02:55:13 so to test a wall incorporating raynaud and other elements you would need to conduct tests under bs 476 part
02:55:22 476 part 20. it's a different concept it's a different test the same distinction i should say also applies in the european classification tests
02:55:33 classification tests the question when one comes back to see what mr verley says in his statement or one question is whether mr verne understood that distinction when he read the bba
02:55:46 that distinction when he read the bba certificate whether in draft or at all
02:55:51 there is of course a question for you as a matter of fact about whether he ever did read it anything other than cursor really anyway uh
02:56:02 anyway uh i'm going to go on to a different document
02:56:05 document uh which is quite a long document and i'm not going to finish it before the break but i'm making very good progress so mr chairman now would be an excellent time to stop for the lunch break if that is
02:56:16 to stop for the lunch break if that is convenient to you and the panel yes well that sounds very sensible if you're going to start another document any moment so we'll take a break now we'll resume at two o'clock please
02:56:29 now we'll resume at two o'clock please and look forward to seeing you again then thank you very much
02:56:58 you