Studio E Evidence - Tuesday 10 March 2020 (1/2)

10 March 2020 · Neil Crawford (Studio E Architect), Counsel to the Inquiry · 3:05:06
▶ Watch on YouTube Open in interactive viewer

Morning evidence session from Studio E architect Neil Crawford addressing window design changes, insulation material specifications, responsibility for fire safety in external wall buildups, and the approval process for cladding drawings.

Key moments

Full transcript

00:01:27 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing I'm going to hear further from mr. Crawford today

00:01:48 [Music] good morning mr. coffee right you ready to carry on yes thank you very much mr.

00:01:59 to carry on yes thank you very much mr. chairman Thank You mr. Crawford good morning and yesterday when we finished we were tracing through the progress of cavity barriers through the Harley drawings in early 2015 and so the next

00:02:11 drawings in early 2015 and so the next stop is the drawings of the 3rd of March 2015 which you will find please @se a zero zero zero one two eight five zero

00:02:29 and this is an email from Kevin Lam - Simon Lawrence copied to you and and Bruce zones and others at Harley of the 3rd of March 2015

00:02:40 3rd of March 2015 Simon please find attached drawings now showing that the fire breaks both horizontal and vertical we assume a requirement for 90 minutes integrity and 30 minutes insulation is sufficient if

00:02:51 30 minutes insulation is sufficient if not please advise the vertical breaks are not on all columns just party walls and if we could next go to se a zero zero zero zero three one six zero page

00:03:03 zero zero zero three one six zero page two we could find your comments on those drawings

00:03:11 and we can see those in your usual read capitals those are yours are they yes and you can see the stamp on the

00:03:22 and you can see the stamp on the right-hand side marked with a B and a date next to your initials 6th of March 2015 you see that yes and you could see in those drawings that they show the

00:03:33 in those drawings that they show the location of the horizontal and vertical cavity barriers on the elevations am i right

00:03:39 right correct they do but we don't see any cavity barriers at all around the windows do we no and I don't think you commented there on the absence of cavity barriers there at the time did you read

00:03:51 barriers there at the time did you read the windows no no it was that because you had understood from mr. Sains that they weren't required

00:03:58 that's from as mentioned previously the strategy was just thing with the compartments and that's correct not

00:04:09 compartments and that's correct not around the windows see if we can go down to page 12 in the same document set please we can see there a yeah we can

00:04:26 please we can see there a yeah we can see there a horizontal cavity barrier set above the window within the cladding can't we yes then that's that just so that everyone else understands what we're talking about it's could you just point it out for us on the drawing very

00:04:41 point it out for us on the drawing very good point let me put it to you then it's the it's the big oh sorry shaded oblong on the left yes so that what you're seeing here is the horizontal cavity barrier which is has

00:04:53 horizontal cavity barrier which is has an inch mess in front so it's held 25 mil or there abouts off the front face of the metal panel so that allows the is pressure equalized

00:05:04 that allows the is pressure equalized for sale beside so allows the air to free freely move up and down the facade right and the cavity barrier position

00:05:15 right and the cavity barrier position has moved from the head of the window on the studio II drawings to further up do you agree that that means that it's now out of line with compartment floor no it's it's lined

00:05:26 compartment floor no it's it's lined with the compartment for the concrete behind us too is the floor but it's not at the head of the window is it anymore it's further up as you can see well

00:05:40 it's further up as you can see well where it should be really crackly bees in the if the extent of the compartment which is cracked where it's drawn now and but it's in the middle of the

00:05:51 and but it's in the middle of the concrete slab it's not at the the line of the concrete slab and the compartment ceiling is it well you couldn't piece you can see there's a sham for at the bottom of the concrete slab it does I

00:06:04 bottom of the concrete slab it does I mean it doesn't comply with dr. wood diagram 33 of a DB because it's not in line with the line of the compartment no that's that's not correct it is in

00:06:15 no that's that's not correct it is in line with the compartment line the compartment line is the floor do you can you explain why it's different from Studio EES original drawing but it's fundamentally isn't fundamentally you

00:06:28 fundamentally isn't fundamentally you say it isn't because both but as I recall I can't that I Drive the drawing front of me but the the drawing would have shown in the cavity barrier within the compartment floor or wall in this

00:06:42 the compartment floor or wall in this instance floor construction so it's lining up with the compartment floor I see okay now if you could look at se a 0 0 0 0 3 1 6 0 page 12 the note next to

00:06:59 0 0 0 3 1 6 0 page 12 the note next to the drawing you see that

00:07:04 yeah

00:07:08 on the left-hand side says it needs to be expanded I think so that we can all relive fire break cut around cladding you see that fire break cut around

00:07:20 you see that fire break cut around cladding rails all joints taped on top face did you think about looking at that whether the proposal to cut the cavity barriers may affect the ability of the

00:07:31 barriers may affect the ability of the cavity barrier to inhibit fire spread within the cladding no why is that because the contractor has drawn on his

00:07:45 because the contractor has drawn on his philosophy of bringing it round the rails I mean this this would be fairly standard way of introducing the cavity

00:07:56 standard way of introducing the cavity barrier across the rail system behind I mean this this there would be no other way to do it right mr. chairman I've lost my connection I'm afraid with the

00:08:07 lost my connection I'm afraid with the transcript I can carry on but I wonder whether and I can have some missiles thank you very good I'll continue mr. Kaufer I apologize and should it not

00:08:18 Kaufer I apologize and should it not have occurred to you at the time the hardly needed to explain to you why the cutting the cavity barriers was safe or appropriate not at all as some as a specialist item and hardly our

00:08:32 specialist item and hardly our specialist sub specialist contractors this is what they do every day so I'd expect them to know what they're doing and how they're doing it and in terms of

00:08:43 and how they're doing it and in terms of at that level of technical construction that's the specialism you're paying for when you employ them I see

00:08:56 when you employ them I see did anybody at Harley or indeed cider eyes ever raise with you the potential for there being a weak link for fire around the windows you recall that being

00:09:08 around the windows you recall that being subjective and we've now looked at Harley's overall design of where cavity barriers should be located I'm now going to turn to the question of what fire

00:09:20 to turn to the question of what fire rating the cavity bearers should have had okay yes they were clear about the topic and now that we've we've got to March at this point March 2015

00:09:31 March at this point March 2015 construction was well underway wasn't it yes yes and still there was no final design reached with regard to the cavity barriers this cracked is great and do

00:09:45 barriers this cracked is great and do you agree with me that that should have been something which had been resolved from 14 months earlier at the tender stage well it was that Nintendo stage because their attitude I mean the same

00:09:56 because their attitude I mean the same from tender stage to now the strategy for the cavity barriers around the windows

00:10:03 windows I can see remained the same but the strategy for the cavity barrier has been in being in line with compartment floors had changed through the Harley drawings as we've seen yes no no you say no no

00:10:15 as we've seen yes no no you say no no all right now go to EXO zero zero zero one three one five please

00:10:28 and I'd like you to look at the second email down on the page this is the email of the 3rd of March 2015 from Kevin Lam to you too Simon Lawrence

00:10:42 from Kevin Lam to you too Simon Lawrence copy to you and mr. Sains and we've seen that and then the one above it from you - Neal - Terry Ashton 3rd of March you see that one yes and if we move up to

00:10:57 see that one yes and if we move up to that you asked the question hi Terry just a quick question relating to Grenfell tower as part of the reclad are we have far added fire breaks sorry let

00:11:08 we have far added fire breaks sorry let me try that one again as part of the reclad we are we have added fire breaks around the apartments as per the email below can you comment on the level of protection 90 plus 30 as to whether this

00:11:20 protection 90 plus 30 as to whether this is suitable my only query might be that we have different levels of party wall at the lower levels see attached fire plan with some 60 some 120 walls ok now at that stage my question is did you

00:11:32 at that stage my question is did you understand Hartley's drawings to show cavity barriers or fire stops I understood them to show cavity barriers part of the pretext to Kevin laments

00:11:44 part of the pretext to Kevin laments email was that we've been having a number of meetings with Building Control on site and there were Crofton of at the back of the design team meetings and

00:11:56 back of the design team meetings and when one the reason that this figure of 1930 came up was from meeting with Building Control were building controlled requested they had that we

00:12:10 controlled requested they had that we had ratings that matched the compartment ratings right the reason Kevin put 90 on set of 60 it was because they can source 60 minute

00:12:23 was because they can source 60 minute cavity barriers so he ended up expecting up to 90 I see if we could look at your witness statement a paragraph 1 1 3 which is a page 41 and that's se a zero

00:12:37 which is a page 41 and that's se a zero zero zero one four two seven five

00:12:52 you can see in paraone 1/3 of in the second line there you say you referred the query to x over and you say as they had produced the fire strategy and so it

00:13:03 had produced the fire strategy and so it would be best placed to respond to the query essentially I was trying to be proactive in resolving the issue of cavity barriers in a neutral way you say which I discussed further from paragraph 2 to 9 below what did you think was your

00:13:17 2 to 9 below what did you think was your relationship with X over at this point which allowed you to use them for advice as and when you felt you needed it I thought they were employed as consultants so same as yesterday was we

00:13:29 consultants so same as yesterday was we looked at the same question yesterday so nothing had changed yes I see now why did you want to resolve the question as you put it here in a neutral way because I said led to earlier we'd had meetings

00:13:42 I said led to earlier we'd had meetings with Building Control and clearly buildings building controls interpretation of both the cavity barrier and fire stop and the ratings of them were quite different to what well

00:13:57 them were quite different to what well what originally Harley had proposed in their RFI and then what I was saying based on what my belief was we should be fitting in I in line with employers

00:14:09 fitting in I in line with employers requirement scheme and so going to hire fire Authority in a way seemed like a logical way to check ok you know let's

00:14:20 logical way to check ok you know let's get an authority to view on what the correct level and rating should be I see I see so it would this be right that you

00:14:32 I see so it would this be right that you were really acting as a go-between as between Harley on the one hand and and and Building Control on the other and had gone to x over 2 as it were break

00:14:43 had gone to x over 2 as it were break the deadlock

00:14:49 nestled between but would you say part of the process trying to resolve resolve the problem as an architect or someone

00:15:02 the problem as an architect or someone occupying that role was it not up to you mr. Crawford to understand the issue and to advise your clients and not act as a neutral party better why's that and that's why I suppose in exception to the

00:15:17 that's why I suppose in exception to the last phrase you used is that I was part of that process but you have to understand you've got a specialist who has more experience than you installing these systems every day

00:15:28 these systems every day who's saying one thing you've got building control who ultimately you have to satisfy the last word in terms of signing the building off in achieving

00:15:39 signing the building off in achieving building control compliance so respectful you have to understand what their understanding is if that's contradicts what the specialist understanding is and what your

00:15:50 understanding is and what your understanding is then it's perfectly logical to then go too far consultant in my view to to help resolve that scenario why would you think that building control would have a better

00:16:02 control would have a better understanding of the regulatory requirements than than youth because they signed them off every day but as the project architect using the title

00:16:14 the project architect using the title that was given to you was there not your responsibility at least in part to understand and have a view but I did understand half of you but who's been contradicted by other parties I mean you

00:16:30 contradicted by other parties I mean you can probably appreciate just from the volume of email correspondence on it and I've also alluded to the fact that there were meetings which generated some of those whose proposals there is something

00:16:45 those whose proposals there is something that has to be resolved and

00:16:50 in coordinating the building controls approvals process I had to get it into a shape that was recognized and agreed by

00:17:01 shape that was recognized and agreed by everyone to achieve that okay you you refer to 60 minutes and 120 minute party wall ratings is that because you thought

00:17:12 wall ratings is that because you thought Harley was proposing firestops and not cavity barriers no I think I think Harley were always proposing cavity barriers I think hem I think building control for quite some

00:17:25 I think building control for quite some time became fixated with the idea that it was fire stops and to my mind and to Harley's mind they weren't right well

00:17:37 Harley's mind they weren't right well we'll look at that a little bit more closely as we go through the documents next can you go please to se a zero zero zero one two nine zero six

00:17:54 and this is an email from you to mr. Lam and Simon Lawrence at Wright and Kevin ladders at Harley

00:18:05 ladders at Harley Simon Lawrence at ridin copy to Bruce sounds and others and you can see that there's an attachment fire strategy hi Kevin as pervert elephant conversation

00:18:16 Kevin as pervert elephant conversation I've asked the question of X over on the fire break note the words but not on anything back to me the fire breaks would have to follow the ratings of the party walls which are shown on the fire

00:18:27 party walls which are shown on the fire plan attached you can see some of the low level apartments are separated by 120 minutes and others by 60 minutes it looks from that and correct me if I'm wrong mr. Crawford that you were

00:18:38 wrong mr. Crawford that you were thinking there about fire stops fire stopping and not cavity barriers yes no I can see why I might think that but um the the issued hid it originally come

00:18:51 the the issued hid it originally come from the correspondence and the meetings with Building Control who kept coming back to this notion that it was a fire stop and our understanding my

00:19:04 stop and our understanding my understanding at the start that it wasn't they were making some arguments as to why it might be and I've put myself in their frame of mind to think well maybe it could be but I couldn't

00:19:15 well maybe it could be but I couldn't see how it could be so in a sense and challenging that that proposition I mean collectively as a team will try to work out what the actual solution was

00:19:28 to work out what the actual solution was in our parts Lord down the building where it is actually a fire stop because of its curtain wall coming into the floor slab as opposed to a bit Volvo

00:19:39 floor slab as opposed to a bit Volvo client so there's also those have written for slight misinterpretation depending which part of the building you're looking at I think two things come out of that answered which I just

00:19:50 come out of that answered which I just want to follow up briefly if I can des for the first is you say the issue that originally come from the correspondence and the meetings with Building Control yeah I think it's right that we don't see or you're engaging Building Control on this issue until later in March yes

00:20:03 on this issue until later in March yes but we've had workshops on site with Building Control and fun things that was discussed was the the capital area our strategy yes do

00:20:16 the the capital area our strategy yes do you say you say workshops and you mentioned these workshops yesterday do you remember whether any written record was made of these workshops at which these matters were discussed I personally beyond the notes I had in

00:20:27 I personally beyond the notes I had in my sketch and was not English not making not formal notes but we saw one of those yesterday the one that were said fire strategy not approved you didn't make

00:20:38 strategy not approved you didn't make any other notes of these workshops correct I'd not be able to trace them no and have you ever have you seen or being shown any other written record of these workshops in the course of putting your

00:20:51 workshops in the course of putting your witness statement together not from the information that we had but they were very I think sometimes sometimes it's mentioned on the back of design team

00:21:02 mentioned on the back of design team meetings because what was happening said the design team meeting then right and we would bring in either Harley and our Building Control and you'd have a workshop off the back of it let's say

00:21:14 workshop off the back of it let's say well if you give me for just taking a time out on this for a moment mr. Crawford and just pursuing this you came into the project in the summer of 2014 when was the first workshop we're building control you attended I'd have

00:21:28 building control you attended I'd have to go back in check decorum I mean I tried to fit together based on the meetings I had in my Outlook diary when I thought those

00:21:41 Outlook diary when I thought those Accord is there's there's references to meetings in some some emails and also in

00:21:52 meetings in some some emails and also in relation some of the design team meetings also writing was having separate meetings with Building Control so whether I ended up just sitting in those is is it's very difficult to to

00:22:07 those is is it's very difficult to to definitively say when's all of them were or how regularly did they happen

00:22:13 there's probably there were they were distinct meetings where the strategy was discussed and markups were done and

00:22:24 discussed and markups were done and those ones are easy to pinpoint the ones in relation to the cladding lose at least two or three two or three during the whole of your involvement in the project yeah I think there's one before

00:22:35 project yeah I think there's one before Christmas saying is one about middle of February there's one late March april-ish something like this those are quite specific recollections mr. Crawford of these meetings yes I don't

00:22:49 Crawford of these meetings yes I don't think we see any sign of those in your witness statement possibly not because in PIN why's that because we can pin down precise dates and times they were

00:23:00 down precise dates and times they were quite and four yep they were quite informal meetings and this time making the connection to them happening off the back of maybe design team meetings and so on bit drawings were put out and them

00:23:13 so on bit drawings were put out and them discussed in a you remember them because you remember I guess in the meetings you've given us three such meetings Christmas 14 that we're just getting us

00:23:24 Christmas 14 that we're just getting us down

00:23:25 down February 15 March 15 March April and is the problem I can't see it definitively

00:23:32 trying to train the best you can to remember who was present at each of those meetings and Harley in building can't lose building control meetings

00:23:43 can't lose building control meetings those two or three Harley lose at least two or three workshops and some of them had both who from Harley let's start with them and who was present at each of

00:23:54 with them and who was present at each of those in some instances it was Ray in Ben and some insist Kevin and who from Building Control please and John and

00:24:05 Building Control please and John and Paul and bit Paul not necessarily all of them with John certainly and can you remember what occasions or caused each

00:24:16 remember what occasions or caused each of these meetings to happen when they did I think writing work where what King the parties in the background and I think they strategically saw them as

00:24:28 think they strategically saw them as let's have a discussion on this or that or I say they were aware of the issues that were that were arising from the development of the cladding package

00:24:39 development of the cladding package what issues arose from the development of the cladding package that occasioned the Christmas fall team meeting I can say pacifically what issues occasion

00:24:53 say pacifically what issues occasion that arose out of the cladding package occasioned the February 15 nothing I mean I think the way I'd phrase it is that there's the initial conversation about the cavity virus that precipitated

00:25:05 about the cavity virus that precipitated are meeting with Building Control and Harley to help resolve it and I suspect that was the one before Christmas and possibly and the one round boat mid to

00:25:16 possibly and the one round boat mid to end ferry right and what and same question in relation to the March April meeting what what issues arising out of the cladding package occasion of that meeting that's a discussion the the the

00:25:27 meeting that's a discussion the the the progress of the the building and the materials that are being used on the building okay and we you've given us some quite detailed evidence just now about three meetings at which Harley and Building Control individuals were present and we

00:25:39 Control individuals were present and we don't get any of that from your your witness statement and my question is why not well for the I suppose the reasons that I've been making clear now is that we didn't have anything concrete to pin

00:25:51 we didn't have anything concrete to pin in the day we couldn't pin the dates on them and we couldn't pin the precise IC conversations the notes I mean this is

00:26:03 conversations the notes I mean this is purely recollection my memory and I new meetings took place even the dates I'm giving you I'm not sure it could have been month this we're a month that way I don't we don't have records to

00:26:16 don't we don't have records to definitively say I just know those meetings took place can you explain to us please why you can remember those meetings in a little bit of detail at least now when giving evidence to the

00:26:28 least now when giving evidence to the inquiry today but couldn't do say well didn't do say been induced your statement in November - I did have lose met rep I did have that recollection we know I wrote the

00:26:40 that recollection we know I wrote the statement witness statement but we don't I think find any reference to these words because in the statement do we mr. Crawford I really I just want to know why that is it's a good point the

00:26:51 why that is it's a good point the probably should have been in there I mean they were discussed and putting this statement together but the statement was done limited resources and time and I couldn't be definitive I suppose this reluctance to anything in

00:27:03 suppose this reluctance to anything in when you can't be pinpoint it's like you know something's happened and you remember bits of it but you know was it

00:27:14 remember bits of it but you know was it was it December was it January exactly who was at which one I mean is right the

00:27:25 who was at which one I mean is right the second thing that arose out of that answer which is now several pages back in the transcript I have it at page 12 is where you say that you were talking I

00:27:38 is where you say that you were talking I think about parts lower down the building where it's actually a far stock because of its curtain wall coming into the floor slab as opposed to a bit of over clad and so there's room for a slight misinterpretation depending on which part of the building you're

00:27:50 which part of the building you're looking at oh I don't think that's necessarily what was being discussed there well looking back at the email if we can come back to where we were you are expressing an opinion aren't you -

00:28:01 are expressing an opinion aren't you - mr. lamb that the firebreaks would have to follow the ratings of the party walls because you say to me they would they would have to follow the ratings of the party walls yeah I think this is after

00:28:12 party walls yeah I think this is after had had the conversation with Paul Hanson where he kind of implied that that's what they should do and I thought I probably had adopted his opinion and

00:28:23 I probably had adopted his opinion and that respect well when was that conversation there was a there's an email I think what

00:28:34 email I think what for 6th of March 2015 well there might have been in mind the workshop sir could have minded the emails rather then I don't know it's right

00:28:47 don't know it's right there's certainly there's a lot of confusion over there they say there's difference of opinion and what the rating should be and really should I

00:28:59 coming back to my original question having gone through this it would you accept that in this email you are expressing the opinion about fire

00:29:10 expressing the opinion about fire stopping and not cavity barriers which is why you say that they would have to follow the ratings of the party walls no I've used the term fire embrace which is not fire stopping I to be honest I'd

00:29:22 not fire stopping I to be honest I'd never thought they this should be inspire stopping within the build-up the fact the notion the fire stopping came from building control trying to reconcile in my head why they thought

00:29:34 reconcile in my head why they thought that for those that they thought because the actually the building has a you could they see the upper floors the concrete slab and as a built in there's

00:29:46 concrete slab and as a built in there's a built in beaten it runs between the column so it was cast in it's actually part of the structure and because building control kept pushing forward this notion that is fire stopping I

00:29:58 this notion that is fire stopping I thought well okay are they are they've seen this is the edge of the slab and somehow the cladding fitting in front of that and it being fire stopping and so this a confusion is to use normally the

00:30:10 this a confusion is to use normally the the fire stopping would go to the back line of our cladding wall so for example so you didn't have that concrete up stand and you had SF s for example

00:30:21 stand and you had SF s for example sitting on the slab or structural SF s might affront you would have fire stopping to the back of the I say see people or something that's how you do it in a in new construction typically if

00:30:35 in a in new construction typically if you might do it and you can so I think Chris Hammond happened with the seeds of things are trying to understand the thinking of building control I had to get to find her

00:30:47 control I had to get to find her building control agreed with our interpretation of what was being proposed and that was part of this process it may be that the terminology was getting confused in some of the

00:30:59 was getting confused in some of the emails or the the adopted position was shifting and thinking but from my perspective it was always started this

00:31:10 perspective it was always started this cavity bearers I didn't agree with the cavity barrier strategy that Harley had was trying to try to get to a position with with Building Control that they

00:31:21 with with Building Control that they accept what we were proposing that our interpretation was acceptable to them event of the day they were signing off and they had the last word on compliance

00:31:32 and they had the last word on compliance so there had to be an agreed session to further questions on this and then we'll move on from it first it's right isn't it that we don't see anywhere in this

00:31:44 it that we don't see anywhere in this email you telling mr. Lam that you'd had a discussion with Paul Hanson about the fire break requirements and that you were reflecting his views why is that

00:31:56 were reflecting his views why is that well not in this email but why is that well as I said there's a number of workshops and that's where Kevin got the 90 from or 60 you know that it's at that

00:32:08 90 from or 60 you know that it's at that point because there's definitely a meeting and I'm sure it's the pre-christmas one where we start with building control and I mean and we put forward this notion of marrying up to the compartment wall ratings so that's

00:32:21 the compartment wall ratings so that's where that's coming from and there's been conversations obviously in between and then that's generated by what I've written and that email where did these workshops take place on site you see

00:32:34 workshops take place on site you see according to the RB KC rec we have the dates of site visits of 29th of August 29th September 24th November 27th

00:32:48 29th September 24th November 27th November

00:32:48 November then none till the 15th of May 2015 if that's correct what are these workshops did into that the show you talked about site visits by

00:32:59 the show you talked about site visits by RB Casey that's completely separate right RB Casey yes Building Control oh sorry

00:33:10 sorry RPC from happy City Building Control yes yes sorry by RB Casey I meant building control site that is right so how do your workshops fit into that can you

00:33:21 your workshops fit into that can you read the dates again yes 29th September 24th November 27th November all 2014 and there's one in August as well and then not until the 15th of May 2015

00:33:32 15th of May 2015 mr. Crawford okay to me we would do the more definite size but in the early half of early portion of 15 I mean those the earlier dates though incredible ones

00:33:46 earlier dates though incredible ones which I may or may not have been at

00:33:49 right you don't mean you can see why I'm pressing this because there are other people will have to ask about this and this is the first me yes and I understand it with this perhaps is the reason I'm so reticent or lousã reticent

00:34:00 reason I'm so reticent or lousã reticent fit into witness statement because he didn't have the precise States just aware that there were series of meetings and can specifically point to when there

00:34:11 and can specifically point to when there are I see well let's move on because later on the same day you actually email Paul Hanson at our bkc Building Control and let's look at that it s EA zero zero zero zero zero two five two

00:34:28 and this is an email from you to him as I say at 1549 copied to John Hoeven at our bkc building control at Simon

00:34:39 our bkc building control at Simon Lawrence Kevin lamb and others and you make reference to some attachments at the top there hi Poole following our conversation this afternoon this reminded me of another

00:34:51 afternoon this reminded me of another issue where are we over cladding and what fart site where we are imitating what fire rating do we need to allow for within the wall build-up between apartments see below and attached now it

00:35:05 apartments see below and attached now it looks from that that you were actually raising this issue with mr. Hanson for the first time on the 6th of March yeah I've been parties that most of the

00:35:19 yeah I've been parties that most of the conversation is with John John Ruben I consider Paul to have a greater fire knowledge than John so in this instance of deliberately is that this is as I

00:35:32 of deliberately is that this is as I recall that I was still a building giving us if you like an abstract descript description of we're asking but

00:35:45 descript description of we're asking but we were thought the cavity barriers were going to go in order to get his view so in order for him to quantify what he thought was the appropriate solution and

00:35:57 thought was the appropriate solution and was in those locations because I felt with John you know I was being shown things that I didn't agree with but why

00:36:08 things that I didn't agree with but why didn't you ask the question to John Hoeven but I think the conversations before we're with John why are you asking this question of Paul Hanson and not John Heyburn because in my view poll had greater fire

00:36:21 because in my view poll had greater fire understanding than John I see the turning to the question itself where are we over cladding what sorry where we are over tanning what fire rating do we need

00:36:32 over tanning what fire rating do we need to allow for within the wall buildup you don't identify the design all the materials in the cladding system or the wall build-up as you refer to it I'm not in this email no and you were

00:36:47 I'm not in this email no and you were you expecting him to work that out from the drawings you were attaching Paul would Saturn workshops with us he knew this scheme he knew he knew everywhere on button marking on - right it's not

00:37:01 on button marking on - right it's not like a mystery it's something out of the blue

00:37:04 blue let's look at the drawings which we can see listed in your statement at paragraph 230 if we can look at that please that's se a zero zero zero one for 275 of page 71 you can see that you

00:37:26 for 275 of page 71 you can see that you have a paragraph 230 and you can see at the bottom of the page in the fourth line you say you attached Harley drawings and if you just go over the

00:37:38 drawings and if you just go over the page please mister operator to the top of page 72 you say and I'm afraid it's split over two pages building control could have been aware who we just go

00:37:50 could have been aware who we just go back to the and say sorry back to the bottom of page 230 you say I note by the combination of Harley drawings and c10 5900 rev a building control could have

00:38:03 5900 rev a building control could have been aware of a number of the materials proposed for the over cladding system yes mm-hmm so you say they could have been aware

00:38:14 so you say they could have been aware but they could have of course but you didn't draw to their specific attention well T riyals that you were proposing to use did you then we had up we had a workshop where the city Mateusz were

00:38:25 workshop where the city Mateusz were discussed sake workshops was was this email the first time you had provided drawings relating to the over cladding system to building control

00:38:50 that depends when the workshop took place because we had been having systematic meetings with them discussing right discussing what was happening in

00:39:02 right discussing what was happening in terms of the building envelope so I don't agree that they wouldn't have known what was going on but I can't typically give you dates and times as

00:39:13 typically give you dates and times as mr. Sains at any of these workshops that you refer to and not Larry : did you report back to mr. stones about what you had discussed at these workshops I had may have done did mr.

00:39:24 workshops I had may have done did mr. Sainz know about the workshops he'd have known that they were the workshops for going on there was a meeting outside you say you would have done do you have a recollection actually telling him such

00:39:36 recollection actually telling him such as Bruce I'm going to a workshop all right just being at a workshop and six years ago on off now you don't explain in your email what you wanted mr. Hanson

00:39:51 in your email what you wanted mr. Hanson to do with these drawings did you we can go back to the email if you like well as I mentioned before we've had a series of

00:40:02 I mentioned before we've had a series of workshops and the cladding had been discussed so I don't think it's just a case of you know just firing something off to someone blindly because they had

00:40:15 off to someone blindly because they had followed they had followed and understood in my mind what was happening with this scheme from the workshops and interactions that have taken place inside that these workshops did you hand

00:40:26 inside that these workshops did you hand drawings to our bkc Building Control for them to take away or did you show them the drawings and then take them away yourself no they're quite quite informal and a member they were almost always

00:40:37 and a member they were almost always with Simon he cannot have orchestrated them some once and we sat with them John sometimes John sometimes always well and Harley representatives and we discussed

00:40:51 Harley representatives and we discussed the drawings on table and John usually took things away

00:40:58 every joint John I've summarized has been quite old-school in terms of he lights paper copies and he always co I've got to go to next job so I'm gonna

00:41:09 I've got to go to next job so I'm gonna take this with me and just this kind of thing right okay so when you email this Hanson on the 6th of March 2015 yeah and sent him these drawings were

00:41:22 yeah and sent him these drawings were you just expecting him to refresh his memory about what happened at any of these workshops and then answer the question from that quite I mean I he knew the project he knew this scheme

00:41:45 and let's see the response he gives to you se a zero zero zero one two nine two seven page one please it's a response to

00:42:00 seven page one please it's a response to you copy to John Tobin at our bkc building control 10th of March 11 49 hi Neil this is a b3 matter so it's really John Hogan's reference but effectively

00:42:12 John Hogan's reference but effectively if you mean fire resistance the walls between apartments of compartment walls so the construction should achieve the same fire time as the elements of construction for the building the fire time depends upon the height of the

00:42:23 time depends upon the height of the building as described in 1a of table 2 ADB see that yes he's saying cavity barriers should have the same fire resistances compartment wolves now let's just let's just go back to your

00:42:34 just let's just go back to your statement please page 72 and and let's look at paragraph 231 together you say they're having referred to his email of the 10th of

00:42:45 referred to his email of the 10th of March you say I did not agree with building controls response because I think Paul would misunderstood the question I was asking which was in relation to the fire rating within the

00:42:58 relation to the fire rating within the external wall cavity on the compartment lines as opposed to party walls between Apartments on the floor plate which were already defined on the fire strategy drawings I asked to throw the question to clarify the nature of my query the

00:43:09 to clarify the nature of my query the next day so you say you thought but Building Control had got it wrong yes yes and that you'd misunderstood the

00:43:22 yes and that you'd misunderstood the question and is one of the reasons that he'd misunderstood the question was that you hadn't given him proper context and told him what the materials were and given him any kind of guidance as to the

00:43:33 given him any kind of guidance as to the design of the ever cladding system no I think I'm going back to what I said earlier you had to Kevin's email Kevin's email wine I understood off the back of the workshop that he'd assumed the

00:43:45 the workshop that he'd assumed the rating that had been implied in the workshops I was going back to to Paul because I understood his lessee

00:43:57 Paul because I understood his lessee fire understanding generally overall to be greater than John's and so I was doing and I knew he was primarily concerned with b1 b5 issues but I

00:44:08 concerned with b1 b5 issues but I thought okay if I described it in abstract terms let's see if his if his response marries up with John's because it may be that they're you know the operates and different portions of

00:44:20 the operates and different portions of the of the Part B rags but his insight may be more in line with ours which we would satisfy me that that we were doing the right thing and that we could get it

00:44:32 the right thing and that we could get it signed off which is the ultimate objective either way one thing you're not talking about here is cavity barriers are you know I'm yeah well I'm

00:44:43 barriers are you know I'm yeah well I'm trying to get him to say but his interpretation is should it be a cavity barrier or a fire stop because John's interpretation had been fire stop well let's move on your initial view you'd

00:44:58 let's move on your initial view you'd given 2x over and Harley as you'd said was that the fire brakes had to match had to match the rating of the party wall with all that in which yes we should come from Building Control well you say that have come from Building Control and so it's right as it hit that

00:45:11 Control and so it's right as it hit that at the time you actually agreed with Hanson's advice didn't you mr. Hansen's advice well I think that advice that had come from John all right mr. Howe Burns

00:45:24 come from John all right mr. Howe Burns advice

00:45:26 advice your initial view that you'd Express to it's over and Harley was that firebreaks did have to match the rating of the party wall well I was adopting his view I mean I'm not sure if I was clear in my

00:45:38 I mean I'm not sure if I was clear in my mind what the rating should be at this point I mean this is why I was trying to let's say okay this this a this is

00:45:50 let's say okay this this a this is studio II strategy which I understood there's the Harley strategy and there's the building control strategy right look at the finish your answer yeah what I'm

00:46:01 at the finish your answer yeah what I'm trying to do is get to position we're building control or in an agreement because ultimately for the building to be complete they need to agree that it's compliant if there's a difference of

00:46:12 compliant if there's a difference of opinion the only recourse I've got to trying to resolve that is either having that the conversation between the parties to resolve it or and then going to the fire specialist that's trying to

00:46:24 to the fire specialist that's trying to clarify it if I see it from a perspective of someone a higher level of authority at least in terms of fire related matters so that that's not

00:46:37 related matters so that that's not that's the context in which I was operating the problem is you sing a lot of emails that all jumbled up with other things and so I appreciate it's very difficult to to assemble at that that's

00:46:50 difficult to to assemble at that that's in my head what was what was happening was what I was doing at the time well let's see how far we go with this if you go to the next document which is your email the next day it's se a zero zero

00:47:05 email the next day it's se a zero zero zero zero zero to 60

00:47:21 now this is your response both to Paul Hanson and John Hoeven at our bkc Building Control yes yes 11th of March of 1230 copy to Harley and indeed

00:47:33 of 1230 copy to Harley and indeed writing hi Paul John to clarify what we were trying to understand here was the requirement for fire stopping within the wall build up where the cladding cassettes are mounted over the old

00:47:44 cassettes are mounted over the old cladding are you saying these should mirror the internal compartments i60 minutes in 120 minutes 60 minutes horizontally at floors you see that yes

00:47:55 horizontally at floors you see that yes what did you think the right answer was at that point I thought the right answer was to have cavity bearers at the

00:48:07 was to have cavity bearers at the compartment lines in line with our employers requirement of strategy I mean that was personally what I believed the

00:48:19 that was personally what I believed the correct strategy to be

00:48:26 but mr. Hansen isn't talking about cavity barriers in that or an indeed any other location is he quite he's talking about fire stopping and say why when you

00:48:39 about fire stopping and say why when you responded to him did you not say to him look we are at cross-purposes I want to know about where to put cavity barriers and what those cavity barrier resistances should be not fire stopping

00:48:51 resistances should be not fire stopping been a sense that that's what I'm asking because and let's blend this and this it protects beforehand I didn't understand I was trying to get my head in around

00:49:02 I was trying to get my head in around why he was thinking he was fire stopping we I think we all were trying to understand this because to me the ratings were following what you do if

00:49:13 ratings were following what you do if you were using fire stopping and this is why I was giving him this descript this description of the position rather than anything else trying precipitate out his

00:49:26 anything else trying precipitate out his thinking of you why was he adopting a fire stopping perspective rather than a capybara perspective but mr. Crawford your your reply to him which we've just

00:49:38 your your reply to him which we've just looked at where you clarify what you're trying to understand is quote the requirement for fire stopping within the wall build-up so you're not talking

00:49:49 wall build-up so you're not talking about cavity barriers you're asking him about fire stopping yes but that's because I'm quoting what he's asked for well did you understand the difference between cavity barriers and fire

00:50:00 between cavity barriers and fire stopping yes I mean I've spent my entire career doing Curran walling systems state systems where you do fire stopping and then brick skinned windows we put

00:50:13 and then brick skinned windows we put Everett's skinned SF s construction in stone walls where you use cavity barrier so I understand understood the difference in where you can apply them

00:50:25 difference in where you can apply them what I was trying to understand was where he was coming from particularly in relation to the fact that was over cladding and what what he perceived as the edge of the slab or back of slab relative to the back of cladding whose

00:50:37 relative to the back of cladding whose back to slab the back of the you cladding a backstop to all planning to me I didn't understand I didn't understand where he was coming from in

00:50:48 understand where he was coming from in terms of his fire stopping classification full stop she was trying to get inside his head to to to get him to explain it qualify I mean this is a

00:51:00 to explain it qualify I mean this is a gentleman with whom you say you'd had these informal workshops on a number of occasions would it not have been simpler just to come clean explain your view and ask him to comment but I think we had up

00:51:11 ask him to comment but I think we had up to then the proposals that we discussed with them what was a cavity barrier solution

00:51:17 solution well let's look at another email se a zero zero zero one two nine five three please page one this is an email to you

00:51:31 please page one this is an email to you from Ben Bailey and I should just show you the emails below it we start with the one I showed you earlier from Kevin

00:51:46 the one I showed you earlier from Kevin lambs is at the bottom of page one over to - you see that yes if we looked at the four and indeed yesterday and then up the page we have your email

00:51:57 up the page we have your email - Kevin lamb of the 10th of March please see response from Paul Hanson regarding cladding fire breaks attached which is how it gets into Harley you see that and then we have your email at the top of

00:52:10 then we have your email at the top of the page Ben Bailey comes sorry Ben Bailey's response comes back to you 18th of March at 11:17 to you and to Simon Lawrence so this is coming from Harley to you hi Neal the firebreaks supplier

00:52:22 to you hi Neal the firebreaks supplier who it seems was involved with grenfell at the specification stage has made a comment and I'd like to clarify what fire breaks are required could you confirm what the vertical and horizontal

00:52:33 confirm what the vertical and horizontal requirement is please the spec and supplier technical reps a very different things you see that yes now let's just pursue this a bit further because you

00:52:45 pursue this a bit further because you say something about this in your statement can we have that please page 72

00:52:54 and a paragraph two three three towards the bottom of page 72 you say you have had a conversation with Building Control in the morning and John Hoagland

00:53:06 in the morning and John Hoagland Building Control emailed me afterwards saying and we'll look at that email in a moment just on the the statement you refer to a discussion with Building

00:53:17 refer to a discussion with Building Control in the morning who was that with please

00:53:20 please I think it's John Holden I think it was John Holman okay now let's look at the email you refer to you've given the

00:53:31 email you refer to you've given the reference in your statement it's s EA zero zero zero one two nine six three we just look at that one two nine six three that it's his response

00:53:46 to the message you had sent to pool handsome sir you're looks like your efforts to go to a higher authority on

00:53:57 efforts to go to a higher authority on fire had not succeeded because mr. Hoban was coming back to you mr. Hoban says to you and to pull handsome copied it dear Neal the Building Regulations 2010

00:54:09 dear Neal the Building Regulations 2010 as amended Grenville tower grenfell Road refurbishment thank you for returning my call this morning further to my conversation with you today I would confirm that the fire time for the new elements of structure new columns beam

00:54:21 elements of structure new columns beam sections of compartment floor etc in Grenville tower is 120 minutes as specified in section 1a of table 2 Appendix A of approved document b i would also draw your attention to diagram 33 of approved document b and

00:54:33 diagram 33 of approved document b and highlight the detail between compartment flaws and external cladding in the meantime should you wish to discuss any other aspects of the project kneel then please do not hesitate to call me and it gives you the contact number you see that yes oh he's saying

00:54:44 number you see that yes oh he's saying that when he refers to ADB he's giving his view of the fire time for the new elements of structure should be 120 minutes now my first question is what

00:54:55 minutes now my first question is what did you discuss with John Hoeven during your conversation with him that morning was preceded that email

00:55:09 I think this may have been in relation to the new watch they were going on in the lower floors - I think these changes

00:55:23 the lower floors - I think these changes that are happening around but the vent with the entrance lobby in the community space and some new still weren't going in sporting to see what I think it might have been connected to that I see he

00:55:34 have been connected to that I see he says in his email further to my conversation with you today I would confirm and he goes on to talk about the new elements of structure and 120 minutes etc it was what he was

00:55:46 minutes etc it was what he was confirming they're all in relation to matters in relay in the lower part of the building I believe so so the

00:55:58 the building I believe so so the conversation and indeed this this email or at least that paragraph or this email is not about cavity barriers within the cladding structure is it I don't think so no no did you have any other

00:56:11 so no no did you have any other discussion with him about other elements of that adding such as insulation ACM panels etc at that time in relation to

00:56:22 panels etc at that time in relation to this email I can say definitive

00:56:30 did you go back to him and say look actually my question and you can see this from the second email down was where we are over cladding what fire rating do we need to allow for within

00:56:41 rating do we need to allow for within the wool build up between apartments did you not think to press him on that issue so that his answer didn't simply relate to the lower part of the building but the whole building I think I've done it

00:56:56 the whole building I think I've done it I don't know calm

00:57:07 I mean this first section it may have been that you misinterpreted that inhalation to john albans s right Paul Hanson's

00:57:14 Hanson's commentary I'm not sure actually right okay well let's then move on it omits right to say isn't it that you didn't

00:57:25 right to say isn't it that you didn't respond to mr. Hoban and say that you disagreed with him did you

00:57:35 I can say I don't recall let's look at se a zero zero zero one three zero zero one please moving on in time this is an email from Kevin lamb of Harley to you

00:57:49 email from Kevin lamb of Harley to you of the 25th of March when he sends you some drawings you can see them they're set out as attachments and he says Simon further to our meeting yesterday I'm so

00:58:00 further to our meeting yesterday I'm so sorry this is an email to Simon Lawrence but it's copied to you and Bruce owns Simon further to our meeting yesterday please find attached details for the firebreaks all now upgraded to one hundred and twenty minutes so that's that's where

00:58:14 twenty minutes so that's that's where that happens and next before I start asking you about that I'd like you to go please to se a zero zero zero one three is zero to two

00:58:33 now we need to look at the whole email chain as you can see it the last email in it is at the top of page one from you

00:58:46 in it is at the top of page one from you too Simon Lawrence copied to Simon O'Connor of the 27th of March 2015 but if you scroll down to the bottom please you can see that the first email in it

00:59:00 you can see that the first email in it is an email from Ricky Kay if you could be shown that bottom email which is on page two and over to page 3 page 2 at the bottom will do this is an email that

00:59:13 the bottom will do this is an email that you didn't receive yourself but it is it was sent by Ricky Kay of cider eyes to Ben Daley copied to Kevin lamb and marks

00:59:24 Ben Daley copied to Kevin lamb and marks Tapley at Harley among others and it's the 26th of March 2015 hi Ben apologies for the delay please find below extract from the approved

00:59:36 find below extract from the approved document b of the building regulations and then he sets out an extract from it and you can see that it says cavity barriers integrity 30 insulation 15 you

00:59:48 barriers integrity 30 insulation 15 you see yes and mr. K who I should say is the National facades manager at cider eyes says you here you can see that it clearly states the 30 minutes fire

01:00:00 clearly states the 30 minutes fire integrity and 15 minutes insulation is all that is required from a cavity fire barrier this is reference to rain screen tanning applications where the cavity barrier is deemed to be on the outside of the building

01:00:12 ar-ar-ar 8:25 90 straight 30 will offer 90 minutes fire integrity in 30 minutes fire insulation therefore exceeds minimum requirements 120 minute fire rating is generally the industry

01:00:23 rating is generally the industry standard for curtain wall to concrete slab edge fire stopping where the fire stop is located on the inside of a building and is considered to be a continuation of the floor slab please get in touch so you see that mm-hmm and

01:00:36 get in touch so you see that mm-hmm and this as I say part of the email string that you received in copy we see that from the next but but one email I'll just run up with you

01:00:49 but one email I'll just run up with you if I can the next one is Ben Bailey - Simon Lawrence and Simon O'Connor at Ryder and copied to Harley others in Harley Simon as discussed please see the

01:01:04 Harley Simon as discussed please see the email below from the firebreak supplier there is quite a large cost difference between between offside arise and the spec recommend and upgrading to the 120 minute barrier as we discussed on Tuesday can you for this to the class representative for approval please and

01:01:16 representative for approval please and then it comes to you you see Simon Lawrence on the 27th of March sends it to you sent the email string to you hi Neil following Tuesday's design meeting Harley viola supply chain of questioning

01:01:27 Harley viola supply chain of questioning the rating of the cladding firebreaks apparently by going to two hours we discussed has a cost increase of around twelve thousand pounds the supplier is saying it needs only to be thirty minutes everywhere as per the regs extract below could you take a look to

01:01:39 extract below could you take a look to see what you think it is with John Tobin please you see that yes then your response to that is on the 27th of March a little bit later in the morning -

01:01:50 a little bit later in the morning - Simon Lawrence copy - Simon 8 O'Connor hi Simon

01:01:53 hi Simon have spoken with John and he wasn't happy with Hartley's email as we are talking about fire stopping as opposed to cavity barriers I've explained again the specifics of our scenario and he will have a conversation with Paul Hansen to see if there's a reduced spec

01:02:05 Hansen to see if there's a reduced spec that they can agree to and will then speak with Hartley's directly now I've shown you the whole of that email string so my questions honest of this do you accept the belong and the short of this

01:02:16 accept the belong and the short of this email exchange is that if you were talking about cavity barriers as opposed to fire stops then one hundred and twenty minutes was not necessary and that the upgrade to one hundred and twenty minutes for cavity barriers would

01:02:27 twenty minutes for cavity barriers would be to increase cost and possibly delay absolutely yes do you agree that there was some pressure on site to a so far as you could understand to avoid having to specify cavity barriers with a

01:02:39 specify cavity barriers with a resistance of one hundred and twenty minutes yes yeah and the main concern was cost and and delay as opposed to fire safety

01:02:50 well I can't speak on behalf of Dada participants in that conversation but you might read that into what they've written yes now if we then move forward and we could see what you say to John

01:03:03 and we could see what you say to John Tobin go please to se a zero zero zero zero zero two six four because we can see you forward mr. K's email to John

01:03:14 see you forward mr. K's email to John Koeppen do we see you see that and here we see on page one the Ricky K 26th of March email yes would you then send on

01:03:28 March email yes would you then send on to John Hoban on the 27th of March at 10:53 in the morning hi John there has been a lot of conversation on site about the cavity barrier requirements to be

01:03:39 the cavity barrier requirements to be fitted between the existing concrete external wall panels and the new external rain screen and a million cassettes

01:03:46 cassettes can you please see the proposal by the cladding contractor below and confirm that if this is acceptable to you so you're now talking about quite clearly I would suggest to you about cavity

01:03:58 would suggest to you about cavity barriers yes yes yes and we've seen what mr. K says and you asked mr. Hoban if he will confirm side arises proposal if we

01:04:09 will confirm side arises proposal if we go back please to se a zero zero zero one three zero two two

01:04:23 here's the email we looked at a moment ago on the of 1103 it's in about 15 minutes or so after you send the Ricky Kay email to to John Hoeven you tell

01:04:35 Kay email to to John Hoeven you tell Simon Lawrence a trident hi Simon I've spoken with John I'm assuming that's John Hoeven yes yeah and he wasn't happy with Hartley's email as we're talking about far stopping as opposed to cavity barriers so there we

01:04:46 opposed to cavity barriers so there we see the the of the issue yeah so can I just add I mean to me I mean that's making quite clear that you can see that

01:04:57 making quite clear that you can see that John John thinks it's far stopping any one's the iRacing yes and this is an email the indeed and this is an email from you too - Simon Lawrence of Ryden

01:05:09 from you too - Simon Lawrence of Ryden but you don't give your view in this email do you don't say that he's he's cross purposes well let's just say from the outset we had a strategy and that's

01:05:22 the outset we had a strategy and that's our strategy and I've stopped by it the fact is that other people have not accepted that strategy of who fold other strategies in a coordinating building control submissions is my role to get to

01:05:35 control submissions is my role to get to a point where there was an agreement that Building Control could sign off right did you actually think that the issue was about far stopping as per your initial view as we saw earlier what was

01:05:47 initial view as we saw earlier what was your main concern just to go easy with Building Control in order to get a sign-off no no my my view is cavity bearers to start with I wanted to entertain some of try to entertain some

01:06:01 entertain some of try to entertain some of building controls thinking to understand whether we collect filiz are designed to miss something so for example did there was some legit there may have been some legitimacy to their

01:06:12 may have been some legitimacy to their thinking of it as far stopping and hence I rating test that with the design team and then get to a position where there was a collective agreement ultimately building it all had to agree to whatever

01:06:24 building it all had to agree to whatever solution was being proposed if they were insistent on a cavity barrier or fire stopping

01:06:31 stopping of a higher value then well first of all you can do fire stopping that's the reality but if they if they insisted in a cavity barrier solution of a higher

01:06:42 a cavity barrier solution of a higher rating and that's the only way to get them to sign off then you'd put in the higher rating and you say okay you might have been able to charge your low rating higher rating is he's good to air are

01:06:55 higher rating is he's good to air are not positive sciences you were under contract to Ryden at this point yes and why didn't you simply set out your professional advice to your client in

01:07:08 professional advice to your client in this email to mr. Lawrence well that what about what the cavity barrier of ratings would be well he knew he knew what her position was and why didn't you

01:07:23 what her position was and why didn't you tell writing that you were going to get back to building control and put them right Sammy knew that's what I was trying to do he knew that I mean he'd asked me to speak to bone in control and

01:07:35 asked me to speak to bone in control and he in the reason he'd asked me to speak to building controls to try and broker that acceptable solution so you were you were really acting as a as a broker your word between the

01:07:47 as a broker your word between the conflicting views I said to broker a solution I don't consider myself a broker as such all right now mr. chairman that may be a convenient moment for a break yes I'm just wondering since

01:07:58 for a break yes I'm just wondering since we've gone over this yeah 20 past 12

01:08:18 we've gone over this yeah 20 past 12 2011 and then

01:08:34 25:12 oh no not 20 not 12 past 11

01:23:27 [Applause]

01:23:42 right mr. Crawford no I think I was being a bit too ambitious when I suggested you who goes through the rest of the morning without a break you know I've suggested mr. minute if we did he find a convenient place around about

01:23:53 find a convenient place around about five past 12 okay they'll give you roughly 45 minutes and then a break and another 45 minutes yes mr. Crawford and

01:24:04 another 45 minutes yes mr. Crawford and first of all can I just correct or fill in some dates of site meetings in the record that we have and just add a few more

01:24:14 more so that wick we're clear there were meetings on site at the 16th of January 17th of February 26th of March 17th of

01:24:25 17th of February 26th of March 17th of April than 22nd of April 2015

01:24:32 there were site visits not necessarily meetings on site and at the moment we are still exploring who was present but I didn't want you to think that the list of dates that I'd given you earlier was the only dates that we have in the

01:24:43 the only dates that we have in the record secondly just a couple of other questions that arose out of this question about workshops and did you keep a notebook an architect's notebook I have my sketchbooks which I generally

01:24:59 I have my sketchbooks which I generally carry with me and it's depending how involved them in the meetings I may or may not miss kit you know take notes or sketch and did you keep a diary of your

01:25:12 sketch and did you keep a diary of your appointments generally if I'm at the office it's going to though look dairy sort at the grain for site or whatever

01:25:24 sort at the grain for site or whatever it's not foolproof but if for example can you you had a design team meeting coming up and you're going to be out Tuesday morning their needs then then I

01:25:35 Tuesday morning their needs then then I usually put that in from about Christmas 2014

01:25:39 2014 where was your office visit in London Bridge or we used to in Renville Road [Music]

01:26:00 remember Versailles states on it to check okay do you remember whether you entered into your Outlook diary the workshops that you were to add to it that you were to attend um some of those

01:26:14 that you were to attend um some of those workshops are kind of informal off the back of design team meetings and things like that so that's why I don't I don't have formal record on life just to get

01:26:25 have formal record on life just to get back then to the email string or traffic that we were looking at before the break we now come to late March 2015 what I'm going to do is take these quite quickly just to show you the documents and ask

01:26:36 just to show you the documents and ask for one or two questions on them gay please first is se a zero zero zero one three zero three four

01:26:53 this is an email from you to John Hoeven at our bkc 30th of March 2015

01:27:06 at our bkc 30th of March 2015 hi John Ben Bailey from Hartley's is who you might ask for and you give a phone number do you know whether mr. Hoban ever did speak to Ben Bailey I don't

01:27:19 ever did speak to Ben Bailey I don't know did you ever follow it up I can't call I mean then we go please to the next document which is se a1 Bessie a

01:27:30 next document which is se a1 Bessie a zero zero zero one three zero three six please this is John Howe Burns reply to

01:27:42 two

01:27:48 do you research you see with foot before that's we haven't it's similar to the one we saw before and he says Darrell and he refers again to the building

01:27:59 and he refers again to the building regulations please find detail below a copy of an email sent to various persons on the 20th of March 2015 and you can see that underneath it we looked at that earlier this morning and it is quite similar in layout concerning the topic

01:28:11 similar in layout concerning the topic relating fire stopping of the compartment floors to the building I would advise you that it is my interpretation of diagram 33 of approved document b that the detail between compartment floors and external calving

01:28:23 compartment floors and external calving is not a cavity barrier therefore it must be fire stopped to at least the standard of the existing compartment floor 120 minutes therefore the methods described in clause 913 would not be

01:28:34 described in clause 913 would not be appropriate in this particular case you see that yes and then you reply the next day if we can bring that up please that's se a zero zero zero zero zero two six five

01:28:48 and you say hi John unfortunately this problem is not going away the subject of fire barriers is causing a lot of concern on site not least because of the

01:29:00 concern on site not least because of the of program and cost I have forwarded a copy of diagram 33 in the typical floor detail and we are all missed as to why this detail is not a cavity barrier in this location please see attached you see that yes the

01:29:13 see attached you see that yes the relationship between the back of the slab and the cladding remains the same as the original tatting concrete is retained and therefore the integrity of this relationship of floor level has not been affected the new cladding

01:29:25 been affected the new cladding constitutes an additional layer applied on top not a new floor slab interface and therefore the interpretation is that this constitutes a cavity barrier are not a fast on this has now become

01:29:36 not a fast on this has now become something of an issue on site due to program bottleneck so your earliest response to this would be appreciated and you attached to that email as we can see from the attachment a

01:29:50 a drawing and you see that and also a

01:30:01 a drawing and you see that and also a copy also a copy of BR PDF ad be to 2013 there are two documents you see that so you sent him a drawing and you sent him yes a DB type and that turns out to be

01:30:13 yes a DB type and that turns out to be diagram 33 yes with a red box with a red box let's just look at that that's EXO zero zero zero zero one two nine six and

01:30:27 zero zero zero zero one two nine six and you can see the red box at the bottom as you just referred to it our fire stopping is in the gray location and not between floor slab back of retained concrete cladding you see yes okay

01:30:38 concrete cladding you see yes okay that's your annotation is it yes it is and as I just said before you also attached a copy of a drawing which we can see we want to look at it again was

01:30:50 can see we want to look at it again was to see if you remember it without having to go to it was an employer's requirement drawing which we looked at when we looked at the studio YZ cavity barrier design I know they're trying to know the drawing did the question is did

01:31:01 know the drawing did the question is did you appreciate that the studio II design and the Harley design for the location of the cavity barriers was different because the cavity barriers had been moved between employers requirements drawing and the Harley drawings in what

01:31:13 drawing and the Harley drawings in what respect of they'd been moved away from the cop from a compartment line slightly not a material sensor okay why didn't

01:31:25 not a material sensor okay why didn't you send the Harley drawing as opposed to the employers requirements drawing and relented let me put that question again why did you send them the

01:31:36 again why did you send them the employers requirements drawing and not the most up-to-date Harley drawing I'd already sent him the Harley drawings so why would you sending them the

01:31:47 so why would you sending them the employers requirement drawing more evidence I mean they were different but

01:31:58 evidence I mean they were different but they're not you're making a different difference that I'm and I I'm not agreeing with your difference in interpretation both both the capybaras are on the compartment line that's the

01:32:09 are on the compartment line that's the significant point did you have any help from ridin or Harley when you drafted this email let me see

01:32:17 I'm not where that I did I mean we were we were having frustrated conversations which I'm sure you can detect from just the correspondence in that there was a

01:32:29 the correspondence in that there was a bottleneck and trying to get a joint see our point of view which we believe to be correct

01:32:37 correct what made you now become so clear and finally put it this way trenchant in your view that we're talking now about cavity barriers as opposed to fire stopping

01:32:48 stopping what did court hadn't made you do that at this point as opposed to earlier in the discussions that we've seen well I'd argue earlier that said it was pretty

01:32:59 argue earlier that said it was pretty clear to me but it should have been there is a collection of different opinions and the right thing to do is go through those opinions and and verify and check to get the right solution at

01:33:11 and check to get the right solution at this point it was getting frustrating I see looking at the next document which is se a zero zero zero one three zero

01:33:22 is se a zero zero zero one three zero four nine it's an email chain and again looking at the

01:33:31 bottom email on page one and over to page two if we can please it's not that easy they're split but you can you see that you send

01:33:50 an email to Terry Ashton on the 31st of March 2015 but I'm afraid on the screen you've got the second half of that I wonder if the two pages could be put side by side

01:34:02 two pages could be put side by side pages 1 & 2 please it's Crawford sometimes the emails go over two pages and we have to use some magic right so

01:34:13 and we have to use some magic right so you see that at the bottom of page 1 this is an email from you 31st of March at 1205 to Terry Ashton hi Terry and then over on to page 2 can you comment on the history of this item please see

01:34:26 on the history of this item please see correspondence below as it is not clear to me why this item is causing such a difference in interpretation can't see anything that seems to reference it in the fire strategy see that yes did that

01:34:40 the fire strategy see that yes did that itself not ring alarm bells with you that the x over fire strategy was in some way at least incomplete no not

01:34:53 some way at least incomplete no not necessarily I mean we do expense saves cavity by our strategy to be covered enough in a high level fire strategy

01:35:04 enough in a high level fire strategy document not necessarily you just describe the x over outline fire safety

01:35:16 describe the x over outline fire safety strategy that you had seen the last iteration of as a yeah there's a high level fire strategy document just to get back to some questions that we were

01:35:28 back to some questions that we were examining together yesterday did you ever expect X over to produce anything more than a high level report or

01:35:39 more than a high level report or strategy as you call it

01:35:45 a high level outline interchangeable did it did the fact that Xavier had not

01:35:56 solved this question or addressed this question in their lion fire safety strategy not as I say alert you to the fact that this was a detail that xover

01:36:08 fact that this was a detail that xover hadn't covered and now and needed to perhaps in the next iteration of the strategy in terms of the commentary on

01:36:19 strategy in terms of the commentary on before with it we did drill down to Pacific's of fire stopping cavity barriers issues like that only if they

01:36:31 barriers issues like that only if they were less singing of our highly specific and non-standard nature by this time

01:36:44 and non-standard nature by this time late March 2015 you would had to go to x over for quite a lot of ad hoc advice as we've seen you say in relation to compliance of the Celotex the ACM you

01:36:56 compliance of the Celotex the ACM you said yes you said yesterday we've had discussions with them about cavity barriers and fire stopping did that not all tell you that x over now needed to

01:37:08 all tell you that x over now needed to do a full job and give full advice as opposed to an outline followed up by ad hoc as and when piecemeal questions and answers no map my expense and projects

01:37:21 answers no map my expense and projects is that it's quite normal to to speak to a fire consultant in relation to interpretation or issues of Building Regulations right and then

01:37:37 we've seen Terry Ashton's response to you on page one and he says to you this isn't something that would necessarily form part of a fire safety strategy for

01:37:48 form part of a fire safety strategy for a building therefore it wouldn't have been dealt with in the fire safety strategy for the building's for this building he actually thinks it's something outside his outside his scope and then he says I agree with Benkei I

01:37:59 and then he says I agree with Benkei I believe that the cavity barrier is always required in this application even if we were to agree with our bkc it's difficult to see how a fast stop would stay in place in the event of a fire where external flaming occurred as this would cause the sink cladding to fail

01:38:11 would cause the sink cladding to fail we've already looked at that yesterday and we looked at the email at the top of that chain as well yesterday I won't go back to that let's move on in time then

01:38:22 back to that let's move on in time then har zero zero zero one three seven one nine john hoeven emails you twice on the first of April as we see from this exchange if we go to page two please and

01:38:39 exchange if we go to page two please and halfway down page two we can see he emails you on the first of April at 9:57 and thanks you for your email and for

01:38:52 and thanks you for your email and for the attached drawing showing typical catting details the matter has now become more clearer I'd advise you I have no adverse comments to make on the proposal shown on your drawing it refers to the drawing with regards to

01:39:03 to the drawing with regards to compliance with parts B 2 and B 3 and schedule 1 of the building regulations and then he asks for the drawings for the external walls to the boxing club floor met sanding floor mezzanine plus one floor that so that's the lower part

01:39:15 one floor that so that's the lower part of the building isn't it yes yeah and then he says that's impression that sliding straight floor junction details of those particular floors defer from that shown on drawing one two seven nine

01:39:27 that shown on drawing one two seven nine etc and he wants to review those prior to giving further comments on the cladding going up then to page one about the middle of the page he says to you in

01:39:39 the middle of the page he says to you in his second email of the first whole April

01:39:44 April in the first substantive paragraph I've devised you'll have no adverse comments to make on the cladding proposal shown in your drawings with regards to compliance with b2 and b3 and showed you

01:39:55 compliance with b2 and b3 and showed you one of the building regulations you see that on our drawing some high-flying yes exactly so he's not getting he's got no adverse comments to make and then if you

01:40:11 adverse comments to make and then if you go to the next yeah that's right say I don't think we need to see anything else of that document at the top of the page you could then see that because mr.

01:40:25 you could then see that because mr. Hoban has copied mr. Lawrence into the response mr. Lawrence sends that to Harley Ben Bailey and Ray Bailey copied to you and he says gents the building control officer is now an agreement with

01:40:36 control officer is now an agreement with the fire protection in the cladding being a cavity barrier rather than a fire stop as first thought and that is where it all ends now the emails we've just been through related to cavity

01:40:48 just been through related to cavity barriers yes compartment lines we've seen that and sorted out the mess on that did you ever at any point seek any guidance from our bkc Building Control about cavity barriers around the windows

01:41:08 I didn't I don't recall seeking pacifically although there's the general strategy was discussed and the workshops

01:41:19 strategy was discussed and the workshops stopped meetings right did you ever ask our bkc Building Control to approve Harley's design as a whole which omitted cavity barriers around the windows there

01:41:33 cavity barriers around the windows there are aware of Harley's scheme yet but did you actually ever ask them to approve or comment on Harley's design as a whole which as we know omitted any cavity

01:41:46 which as we know omitted any cavity barriers around the windows and I may have done I don't recall I don't recall okay and we're now going to move on to a different topic mr. Crawford the crown now we know that the

01:41:58 Crawford the crown now we know that the design of the crown and correct me if I'm wrong about this but that wasn't finalized before the refurbishment went out to tender was it there's some issues relating to how you dealt with start

01:42:12 relating to how you dealt with start cleaning max s this could influence its design so he's the answer to my question yes it wasn't finalized before the refurbishment went out to tender yes

01:42:25 refurbishment went out to tender yes correct

01:42:26 correct thank you and after an ovation to Ryden in 2014 I think you were then involved in the design of the crown weren't you yes yep and did you give any

01:42:38 yes yep and did you give any consideration as to how the crown may perform in the event of a fire I just understood it is more our minimum panel did you consider whether cavity barriers

01:42:49 did you consider whether cavity barriers may be required between the facade cladding and the crown not out with two agree this structure had been agreed already

01:43:00 you said the strategy that had been agreed already of what was that what was that strategy I run the compartments maintain the components I see

01:43:12 maintain the components I see did you ever consider where the cavity barriers may be required along the crown in order to stop lateral fire spread you

01:43:23 in order to stop lateral fire spread you mean practically I suppose it would be vertically vertical cavity barriers would be required to stop lateral fastbreak so yes that is what I'm asking you

01:43:33 you however consider that they weren't there in the capacity of compartments the

01:43:45 in the capacity of compartments the crown itself was open it's an open element indeed and so there would be no compartments in the crown itself no so does it follow that there were no we

01:43:57 does it follow that there were no we know there were no but you didn't consider any vertical cavity barriers in the crown in order to stop lateral fire spread because there was a requirement

01:44:08 spread because there was a requirement for them not the requirement where within the open portions of the McCrone you say there wasn't a requirement for them I'm interested in the word requirement what I'm just trying to

01:44:21 requirement what I'm just trying to quantify what you were seeing earlier which is that you have the compartment of the apartment if you like below then the kernel itself is a series of boys a

01:44:33 the kernel itself is a series of boys a series of panels yes to do into a lot it's like a hit and miss vent so you have panels doing this yes and I mean

01:44:46 have panels doing this yes and I mean the design was essentially they are the only thing that was that was to be considered was any access coming over the top and whether that would have any implication on the design and can I ask

01:44:57 implication on the design and can I ask you then to look at se a 0 0 0 1 3 2 sorry 1 3 2 2 1

01:45:07 this is an email exchange in late May 2019 we can see that the second email down on that page is an email from Kevin Lam 29th of May 2015 - Simon Laurence

01:45:20 Lam 29th of May 2015 - Simon Laurence copied to you and others at Harley Neal please find attached drawings for the crown element for approval you see that yes and clearly he's asking you to

01:45:33 yes and clearly he's asking you to approve those his word and going up the chain you say well you see that you returned comments to him on the 12th of

01:45:46 returned comments to him on the 12th of June 2015 and two weeks later or so you attach something called crown details SE a comments I Kevin please find attached comments on the crown drawings you see

01:46:00 comments on the crown drawings you see that yes can we have a look at those it's se a zero zero zero zero three two for two please and we can see there we have the crown this is a Harley drawing

01:46:14 have the crown this is a Harley drawing dated 30th of September 2014 at the bottom righthand you can see that no need to blow it up authored by Kevin Lam and it looks like revision naught

01:46:25 and it looks like revision naught because there is no there are no revisions to it and we can see now your phone are familiar read capitals there's your comments on yes and the stamp be dated on stamp to 12th of June 2015 you

01:46:40 dated on stamp to 12th of June 2015 you can see that can we see that yes and all the columns we see that you've indicated

01:46:51 we can see on the columns that that gonna meet asked the question again on the columns vertical fire brakes have been into indicated haven't they yes yes but there's no father or cavity barrier

01:47:04 but there's no father or cavity barrier indicated at the top of the columns is there less correct so on these drawings there was a route for far to spread uninhibited from the columns up to the crown each apartment is that compartment

01:47:21 crown each apartment is that compartment so you have compartment below which is enclosed then you have a compartment above and so there's no requirement to protect the compartment to atmosphere at

01:47:33 protect the compartment to atmosphere at least this is the interpretation I suppose I might have made from from Hartley's decision to omit that cavity burial yes yes because my question I got

01:47:46 burial yes yes because my question I got to ask it again if you look at the left hand side it's easier to look at the left hand side because the right hand side is obscured by the the stamp but if you look at the left hand side of the drawing you can see that there is a

01:47:58 drawing you can see that there is a vertical cavity up the sorry vertical cavity barrier or fire breakers is it's called up for column do you see yes um and it stops and before the crown

01:48:10 yes um and it stops and before the crown starts doesn't it yes it does and so there is no vertical cavity barrier running up into the crown is there these

01:48:23 running up into the crown is there these running up to the base of the crown but not beyond yes no exactly and that means that there was a route for fire to spread uninhibited

01:48:36 a route for fire to spread uninhibited from the columns or up the columns into the Crown's vertically you see up the columns but there's a horizontal break at the compartment level below at the

01:48:48 at the compartment level below at the back at the floor yes so for example if you took the floor below you'd have effectively the compartment to 180 with it's bearish so if you for example that

01:49:01 it's bearish so if you for example that dotted line on the left you where the where the panel stops it's a cat this a cavity barrio running across that or just just off the picture yes the point

01:49:13 just just off the picture yes the point I'm trying to make is that is not continuous : path species what you in fact know I understand that but if a fire broke out in that flat yes

01:49:24 fire broke out in that flat yes above the highest horizontal cavity barrier and and the fire let came out of the flat into the cladding to the to the

01:49:35 the flat into the cladding to the to the left on the picture here it goes straight tampines would go straight up into the crown there'd be nothing to stop it going straight up into the crown it go into the atmosphere because it's open

01:49:44 open but there'd be nothing to stop it that's correct it is travel up yes and there are no cavity barriers indicated at the top of the cladding where it meets the

01:49:55 top of the cladding where it meets the crown and no horizontal cavity barriers to stop any fire going up into the crown less correct yes now earlier we identified that the employers requirement drawings had they kept the

01:50:07 requirement drawings had they kept the horizontal cavity barrier in that location remember that yes say would you agree that this highly design represents a worsening in terms of compliance with

01:50:20 a worsening in terms of compliance with the guidance in approved document b diagram 33 I read Ray Bailey's response his explanation for not including that

01:50:32 his explanation for not including that cavity barrier and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with it

01:50:43 because the the primary properties of the cavity bearers to protect the compartment there is no compartment above it and there's effectively no chimney effect because you only traveling the distance

01:50:54 because you only traveling the distance of one apartment yes now just just to get back let you can answer the question but it's not quite the question you say you read ray Bailey's response and his explanation for not including the cavity

01:51:07 explanation for not including the cavity barrier and you say you wouldn't necessarily disagree with it his response is am i right in thinking in his witness statement not a response as a result of a discussion that you had with him at the time am I right mr.

01:51:19 with him at the time am I right mr. Crawford and that's correct I see so at the time this is what I'm focusing on at the time Hartley's design and I'm suggesting to you represented a

01:51:30 and I'm suggesting to you represented a worsening of the original studio II design in terms of compliance with the guidance in approved document b it may have done yet did you spot that I don't

01:51:46 have done yet did you spot that I don't recall you were asked by as we've seen for your approval and you send back your comment but you don't say we'll hold on

01:52:00 comment but you don't say we'll hold on a moment we need to continue the vertical cavity barrier into the crown and we need to have a horizontal cavity barrier at the top of the column you don't see that do we No

01:52:14 and do you agree that cavity barriers were in fact required in that location not necessarily I mean I think him at a

01:52:25 not necessarily I mean I think him at a Guth race analysis of it well let's look at part let's look at a DB diagram 33 please it's CLG 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4

01:52:54 now can I first take you please to paragraph sorry about the paragraph b3

01:53:06 paragraph sorry about the paragraph b3 subparagraph 4 at page 67 which is internal fire spread structure and just to start at 69 I'm so sorry 69 my fault

01:53:20 to start at 69 I'm so sorry 69 my fault batters in tunnels so if you see that this is internal fire spread b3 and look at subparagraph 4 with me please the building shall be designed and

01:53:31 building shall be designed and constructed so that the unseen spread of fire and smoke within concealed spaces in its structure and fabric is inhibited we were you familiar with that principle at the time you were asked to approve

01:53:44 at the time you were asked to approve these drawings mr. Crawford general principle I suppose so yes yeah and therefore it wasn't simply a question of protecting the compartment but the whole structure of the building

01:53:57 but it's going straight down the sphere there is no structure well let's look at the next page in this document page 82 please I want you to look at diagram 33 with me provision for cavity barriers

01:54:11 with me provision for cavity barriers you see that yes and the very top item there and we saw this I think yesterday it says close top of cavity you see that yes so there's quite a clear requirement

01:54:23 yes so there's quite a clear requirement there isn't there that the that a cavity barrier is required to close the top of the cavity as it says no I disagree entirely and for the reasons I gave yesterday this first of all this is

01:54:36 yesterday this first of all this is guidance certainly she was closing a cavity that opens into a father enclosed space therefore as protecting the unseen enclosed space within the roof did you

01:54:48 enclosed space within the roof did you ever go back to Harley and and and ask them or just seek to discuss with them whether or not you actually needed to close the top of the cavity that you say

01:55:00 close the top of the cavity that you say vented into the atmosphere or whether you could essentially treat diagram 33 is inapplicable

01:55:09 did you do that I don't recall having that conversation I mean if it was your view at the time that there was no need for a cavity

01:55:20 that there was no need for a cavity barrier at the top of the cladding to close the top off if that was your view at the time was there any reason why you

01:55:32 at the time was there any reason why you didn't express that to Harley I'll explain it I think Harley a pretty seasoned contractors they wouldn't be

01:55:43 seasoned contractors they wouldn't be using diagram like this to or NT what they were doing is there a reason why you didn't ask x over given that they were a resource that you frequently had

01:55:54 were a resource that you frequently had resort to what we'd say is that we obviously did Shore capita bara in that location

01:56:03 location Harley chose to admit it maybe maybe I did see it maybe I didn't maybe I trusted their experience and my

01:56:15 maybe I trusted their experience and my interpretation on this I wouldn't necessarily verify every move with every consultant do you actually remember going through the mental thought

01:56:26 going through the mental thought processes of looking at diagram 33 considering the top of the cladding in the diagram we've seen and thinking to yourself well diagram 33 doesn't apply because in the picture the cavity to be

01:56:39 because in the picture the cavity to be closed enters into an enclosed space we haven't got that here so it's irrelevant did you actually go through that thought process

01:56:48 [Music] it's very long time ago to know what civic thought processes went through I mean I had a familiarity with section 9

01:57:01 mean I had a familiarity with section 9 diagram 33 that's built up over many projects so it might it's probably fair to say that manchurian and those things is informed by life's feelings had you

01:57:13 is informed by life's feelings had you ever come across a situation before in your professional practice where you had decided for yourself that a provisional part of diagram 33 didn't apply such as closing the top of the cavity as in this

01:57:25 closing the top of the cavity as in this case that's a very specific question in a very specific element I would be able to commit to you and that without doing research I mean when not applying the

01:57:38 research I mean when not applying the provisions of diagram 33 were you drawing on any industry learning education CPD experience but I think as I mentioned yesterday I'm diagram 33 to

01:57:51 I mentioned yesterday I'm diagram 33 to me is quite pure diagram when you consider what it's expected to cover and its totality it Aref you to interpret it

01:58:03 its totality it Aref you to interpret it the way you're doing there are many its own of all construction types some which are listed yesterday specifically and double skinned construction which is but

01:58:19 double skinned construction which is but by double skinned I mean possibly not what you're thinking of but for example this is really I suppose where I started to question very much the professions so

01:58:31 to question very much the professions so in diagram 33 in section 9 a double skinned facade is typically where you have but it's usually double glazed and

01:58:43 have but it's usually double glazed and then you have an outer skin the inner skin is an octuple it's used for environmental reasons usually the two skins aren't necessarily transparent but invariably are and they can be used for

01:58:59 environmental reasons where you actually utilize the German effects so you have no cavity bars and the chimney can can either be horizontal horizontal vertical

01:59:10 either be horizontal horizontal vertical or just box it's not as same as a winter garden where you actually occupy the space so that space is typically I don't maybe 300 500 wide you can usually get

01:59:22 maybe 300 500 wide you can usually get into it from maintenance probably the best example that people would know is the chard and there it has in glass so you can obviously see what is happening inside that double skinned facade but

01:59:34 inside that double skinned facade but there are many buildings used double skinned facades like that but you can see in the technically you'd argue you'd have to use well your argument is you to be using diagram 33 or section 9 but you

01:59:48 be using diagram 33 or section 9 but you can apply that and still maintain those operational principles so very quickly you find the severe limitations to that's of literal application of section

02:00:03 that's of literal application of section 9 and diagram 33 I mean you can really apply it in my opinion to curtain walls for the reasons I mentioned yesterday you can apply it to for example many

02:00:18 you can apply it to for example many other forms of complex stone a wall construction the example that shown here is literally it lose like two up two down house with traditional double masonry skin wall and

02:00:30 traditional double masonry skin wall and yes I'm sorry I don't want to cut across unit it was a really a yes or no answer and let me try the different way was the thinking that you're now explaining at

02:00:41 thinking that you're now explaining at some length to us here in this hearing room something which went through your mind at the time or or is this something that you've rationalized after the event

02:00:53 that you've rationalized after the event I think I used to what intuition before I think what happens is you you glean knowledge and gain knowledge as you go along and some processes of what you do

02:01:06 along and some processes of what you do are almost our subconscious become subconscious to you based on the your experience well I apply thought specifically at that time I kept a kid I don't recall let me know six years ago

02:01:18 don't recall let me know six years ago before I leave this topic let me just ask one more question you were asked to approve this drawing by Harley did you ever give any thought to how a fire might be able to spread uninhibited

02:01:32 might be able to spread uninhibited between a or among a set of PE cord panels across the crown of this building in the absence of any cavity barriers either within that either within the

02:01:44 either within that either within the crown or at the top of the columns in absence and captive IRA I understand the fire just goes throughout town in this fear you say we would understand it was

02:01:58 fear you say we would understand it was that your thinking at the time I've no idea how I thought that I wasn't consciously noticing everything I thought at the time that this one tried to explain me I mean I don't know why I

02:02:09 to explain me I mean I don't know why I thought at the time I mean obviously thought is now we're going to get to a different topic which is Windows we will have a break very shortly again mr.

02:02:20 have a break very shortly again mr. Crawford for your benefit that can be first we get into the topic I'm going to turn to drawings of windows first if I may and can I ask you please to be shown

02:02:32 may and can I ask you please to be shown se a zero zero zero zero three zero four zero page seven and before I you get

02:02:44 zero page seven and before I you get into the detail of that let me ask you a more general question were you aware that there were two Harley drawings which have the drawing number C 1 0 5 9

02:02:58 which have the drawing number C 1 0 5 9 - 3 0 to revision D each marked approved for construction

02:03:12 so what what you mean by that is to drawing different drawings with the same number or yes of different with different content so yes no but then I'd

02:03:26 different content so yes no but then I'd only been looking at the content pair drawing let's look at the first which is the one on the page or the screen that's

02:03:38 the one on the page or the screen that's page 7 now we're looking here just so you're clear about the window jamb condition okay yeah and that as you can see is stamped by you on the 16th of

02:03:49 see is stamped by you on the 16th of January 2015 and you mark it a say to say yes yes so you're recording that it conforms to design intent and is approved for construction no no no no we

02:04:03 approved for construction no no no no we don't approve for construction architects don't approve drawings the comment on them they're proof for construction is something harley's puron for their own eye okay but Harley

02:04:14 for their own eye okay but Harley approval for construction and then you stamp it status a and really that's it isn't it then goes to construction what else what else intervenes to stop it both distracted bases right right right

02:04:26 both distracted bases right right right and ultimately a proof of construction oh I see we don't we don't to run to Harlan City yes wouldn't start manufacturing this I see who who at riding would give the final approval for

02:04:38 riding would give the final approval for construction based on the drawing - do you think the right management team who I don't know I don't know I mean they have their own internal people at the front project managing that people

02:04:50 front project managing that people assembling the packages managing the costs right the the procurement the warranties everything else on them on individual packages we are not party to that we just comment in abstract or an

02:05:01 that we just comment in abstract or an architectural intent yeah well well let's um let's come back to this and call let's call this the stamped version because it's got your stamp on it right yeah so this is the stamped version and there's a second one

02:05:12 stamped version and there's a second one and it would be wonderful if we could put these up side-by-side this is the offline version at har zero zero zero one zero four four zero

02:05:24 and it would be good if we could have them these two side-by-side yes I think that does it thank you now we'll call that the

02:05:38 thank you now we'll call that the unstamped version so just to be clear we've got the stamp version the left-hand side of the screen and the unstamped version on the right-hand side of the screen all right yes and in both cases we can see that the

02:05:51 and in both cases we can see that the drawings are originally dated the 20th of August 2014 in the little box at the bottom next to the land you see that and they're both given construction issue

02:06:02 they're both given construction issue revision D dated the 13th of January 2015 in the box at the bottom you see that yes yes and they are both as you can see in the drawings of the window jamb condition yes now mr. Lam has

02:06:19 jamb condition yes now mr. Lam has described in his proposed evidence in his statement at paragraph 31 I just want to put to you what he he says

02:06:31 want to put to you what he he says because it's a convenient description this is H AR 104 1/9 at 8 we don't perhaps it's easier not to turn that up

02:06:42 perhaps it's easier not to turn that up because I might lose what's on the screen which we've taken some time to put up there but but let me just summarize it for you he says it was decided to remove the return on the

02:06:53 decided to remove the return on the cladding facing the window and include an aluminium angle instead so can you see that can you see that in the one on the left has as an iguana fixing through

02:07:08 the left has as an iguana fixing through that what you mean yes well the one on the Left exactly the one on the left has a return on the cladding facing see that the return yes yes the window you see that but on the

02:07:20 yes the window you see that but on the right there's been changed and there's a little l-shaped aluminium bracket yes between the cladding and the and the window do you see that yes effect he

02:07:31 window do you see that yes effect he also says that the window vent profile was changed he also says that he added in the detail of the adhesive foam and and you can see again on the picture that in the left

02:07:42 again on the picture that in the left hand of the stamped version there's no reference to adhesive foam just the EPDM you see that yes bomb did you see that they're the little dotted black line yep

02:07:53 they're the little dotted black line yep whereas on the right hand side you've got a larger shaded area with a wither an arrow showing adhesive foam you see that yes right and then he also says

02:08:04 that yes right and then he also says that he removed the local fixing straps to reflect things as they had been built and you can see that I think from just

02:08:18 and you can see that I think from just what I mentioned earlier yes yes exactly at least that's her yes now you just comparing those drawings the words PPC

02:08:34 comparing those drawings the words PPC angle to match panel has been added to the unstamped version and it's not in the stamped version you see that mm-hmm yes and we could also see local fixing

02:08:45 yes and we could also see local fixing straps are shown on the stamped drawing which she's showing that they were to be installed behind the window frame and they've been omitted from the unstamped one I think we've seen that haven't we

02:08:56 one I think we've seen that haven't we yes yes and we've seen the layer of foam now looking at those differences Heath mr. lamb says in his statement that he had had a discussion about these

02:09:07 that he had had a discussion about these drawings in about February 2015 so that's about a month after you had stunt the stamp version as stata say an hour

02:09:21 the stamp version as stata say an hour first of all do you recall any discussion about those drawings in around 30 2015 I don't recall okay but it doesn't mean they didn't take place I

02:09:32 it doesn't mean they didn't take place I mean I'm not saying I'm not suggesting that it didn't mr. proffer I'm just asking yeah your recollection now is it right that the unstamped drawing was not sent to studio II so far as you know

02:09:44 sent to studio II so far as you know if you're telling me that yes well I'm just asking you have you ever before this inquiry began had you ever seen the unstamped version of this drawing with the changes I've shown the don't there is some caveat team at sorry it's not to

02:09:56 is some caveat team at sorry it's not to be difficult but we literally have files with hundreds maybe thousands of drawings I've been be able to categorically say without checking all right

02:10:08 [Applause]

02:10:17 mr. Lam says that in relation to the drawings that we'd be looking at that the fundamentals of the design drawing were reflected by revision d issued on

02:10:30 were reflected by revision d issued on the 13th of January 2015 which is the stamped that well which is both of those actually and that they were ongoing discussions with Studio E about the

02:10:41 discussions with Studio E about the cladding gap between the column cladding and the spandrel cladding well my question is in light of what he proposes to say to the inquiry were there ongoing discussions at this point January or

02:10:53 discussions at this point January or February 2015 about the cladding gap

02:11:04 so this is the cladding gap between the column enclosure and the edge of the window yes between well between sorry

02:11:15 window yes between well between sorry between the plate between the column cladding and the spandrel cladding yeah to be more accurate but but the gap looks the same between the two drawings

02:11:26 looks the same between the two drawings yes indeed and the question is were there ongoing discussions in January February 2015 about how to deal with

02:11:37 February 2015 about how to deal with that gap that don't make my love be no I don't recall all right do you remember whether there was a proposal about how that cladding gap would be dealt with I don't recall I mean there's ruling conversations

02:11:49 I mean there's ruling conversations about multiple aspects in these meetings I don't do you ever recall a discussion with mr. lamb or anybody else at Harley about the use of adhesive foam I don't

02:12:01 about the use of adhesive foam I don't know you don't do you ever remember a discussion with him about the use of the removal of the straps I can't cific

02:12:13 removal of the straps I can't cific clear the pole I mean as I said before they may have been he made a table dirty not

02:12:24 and mr. chairman we are absolutely mid-flow on this but I anticipate a short we don't a ring well I think we'll never have one so exactly I think you'd like a break that

02:12:35 exactly I think you'd like a break that your space will have a temporary break come back at 20 past 12:00

02:12:50 come back at 20 past 12:00 please sorry I know

02:22:02 right would you ask mr. Crawford to come back

02:22:18 right mr. Crawford yes thank you very much mr. chair mr. Crawford and just before the break I was asking you about a discussion with mr. Lam about adhesive

02:22:29 a discussion with mr. Lam about adhesive foam the next question is did you when did you learn about the change in design so that adhesive foam would now be

02:22:40 so that adhesive foam would now be installed in the position it's shown on me on the unstamped drawing I didn't know DISA form was used you didn't know you never knew is that right I don't think so no does it does it come to as a

02:22:53 think so no does it does it come to as a surprise to you that Harley was adding new products to these drawings and then they're not going through you well it only corroborates what I said earlier

02:23:05 only corroborates what I said earlier which is we comment on architectural intent not in Pacific technical you'll recall I said to you that mr. Lam says

02:23:16 recall I said to you that mr. Lam says that the unstamped drawing was changed to reflect things as they had been built did you know at the time that Harley was changing the drawings to reflect things as they had been built I can't say I

02:23:30 as they had been built I can't say I wasn't okay I'm not going to ask you some questions about the design of the windows now the new windows in the cladding system were outside and forward of the concrete slabs at the window head

02:23:42 of the concrete slabs at the window head and the cop and the concrete columns that formed the jams and the concrete spandrel panels which supported the sills weren't they yes yes do you agree that in order safely to be able to place

02:23:53 that in order safely to be able to place the windows outside the plane of the external wall you needed to protect any cavity from the risk of an internal fire migrating around the window edges and

02:24:04 migrating around the window edges and into any cavity lying within the external wall space

02:24:15 the gap between the windows and the internal wall

02:24:28 I think originally we showed the box place face ply with the insulation and possible seal doctor yeah like my

02:24:41 possible seal doctor yeah like my question is a that's a long one but something was supposed to be a simple one you know I'll ask it again do you agree that in order to be able to place the windows safely outside the plane of

02:24:52 the windows safely outside the plane of the external wall you needed to protect any cavity from the risk of an internal fire migrating round the window edges and into any cavity lying within the

02:25:04 and into any cavity lying within the external wall this site that can play companions in this traditionally not building you you have an opening then you have the window and you place the window in the opening the opening

02:25:15 window in the opening the opening usually has a tolerance traditionally that's around there is is usually never violated yeah as the window itself is not violated to fact opening is an

02:25:28 not violated to fact opening is an uninvited opening and it's a nurse bag we specified a bill lining should come up to envira seal to the round opening which we'd have dealt with that snare

02:25:42 which we'd have dealt with that snare away enemy right I'm not quite sure that's an answer to my question but let's see how we go with the next one would you agree with me that in order to comply with the building regulations it was necessary to ensure a number of

02:25:54 was necessary to ensure a number of things I'll put two two new first that all components and materials within the cavity within the external wall construction complied with paragraph

02:26:05 construction complied with paragraph twelve point seven of approved document b which which governs insulation limited combust ability yes if you're pulling a

02:26:16 combust ability yes if you're pulling a DB yes yes and that would include wouldn't it insulation contained within the voids behind the heads jams and sills of the windows yes and if you're following a DB

02:26:27 windows yes and if you're following a DB yes if you're following a DB and if you're not following a DB what would you do you'd have had to find other means to justify that compliance

02:26:38 so you'd need to be able to identify the risk and then fire engineer around it yes I think that's what you're saying yeah now it's right isn't it that the changes in the size and the placing of

02:26:51 changes in the size and the placing of the windows created gaps as a result of moving the windows out of the plane of the concrete structure

02:27:11 there's a gap around the windows I mean you want to show me not drawing definitely but you mean that yeah as a result but I'm asking you you were there

02:27:23 result but I'm asking you you were there yeah busy right there has to make theoretical questions and works HCC for me too if you show me in a drawing what you mean something I'm frightened I'm not I can certainly do

02:27:34 frightened I'm not I can certainly do let's look at se a 0 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 which is the stamped version which I think fortunately we've still got I've still got on my screen you don't have it on

02:27:45 got on my screen you don't have it on yours says SC thank you no that's not it

02:27:52 page 7 is what we want yes thank you window jambs upper levels so just looking at that that's the stamp version that we were looking at earlier and can

02:28:04 that we were looking at earlier and can you see that there's a gap between the sides of the windows and they're adjacent columns on this drawing of between 35 and 90 millimeters yes that's right as the gaps on did the the original scheme involved keeping the

02:28:20 original scheme involved keeping the original window friends and so this one is showing us the the the gap is is being determined by the existing window

02:28:32 being determined by the existing window frame which is that dotted that dotted frame you can see in there yes

02:28:42 so perhaps it may be easier to do this by reference to a version of the drawing in dr. lanes report if I can just do that can you please go to ISU triple

02:28:54 that can you please go to ISU triple zero one one three one two at page seven that's inq1 zero zero zero 1 1 3 1 to page 7 so this is the same same drawing

02:29:07 page 7 so this is the same same drawing dr. Lane has added some colors to it and in in that you can see that the shape of the existing concrete facade leaves

02:29:18 the existing concrete facade leaves channels which appear to be unfilled with insulation to see that yeah those are the yellow Runnels that sit behind the insulation so those are some gaps

02:29:30 the insulation so those are some gaps there was that a matter that concerned you at the time or that you thought might need correction there are very very small gaps to my mind but I didn't

02:29:42 very small gaps to my mind but I didn't concern me at the time not right I I misspoke when I said dr. Lane in fact I meant mr. Poole Hyatt I don't think anything turns on that now although you

02:29:56 anything turns on that now although you address changes to the design of the windows in your in your statement in a number of places I don't think you ever actually specifically address the issue of the size of the gaps between the edges of the window frames and the edge

02:30:08 edges of the window frames and the edge of the concrete window surround all these Runnels that we've seen colored here is there a reason for that

02:30:18 which ones I well take the green shaded area the gaps there yes which we were talking about a little bit earlier you don't specifically address the question

02:30:29 don't specifically address the question of the size of those gaps which existed between the edge of the window and the edge of the concrete itself the surround you don't address that in your statement do you and I just wanted to know why

02:30:41 do you and I just wanted to know why that was I'm not even sure what the point is I mean the installation comes up and it closes that gap yes and my question is really about the choice of

02:30:52 question is really about the choice of materials which I'm here to come to about that but do you recall having any input into the choice of materials used to fill that gap beyond what's in our

02:31:05 to fill that gap beyond what's in our specification I think a 11 + 5 5 5 talks about rock wall to fill gaps and then it's referenced and P 22 the buttface

02:31:17 it's referenced and P 22 the buttface pie and this reference to fire sealing of the internal walls to the edge I mean

02:31:27 let's um let's turn then to a slightly different topic but only slightly insulation materials behind the eternal window lining it's really the same topic

02:31:39 window lining it's really the same topic in a different way and if we could please look at har zero zero zero one zero four four zero in the offline version this is the unstamped drawing we

02:31:50 version this is the unstamped drawing we were looking at before

02:32:02 the offline version har zero zero zero ones you and if we can just have that expanded just a little bit you can see

02:32:13 expanded just a little bit you can see again we've looked at this before the adhesive foam the aluminium angle another change is at the top of the drawing to the right of the column do

02:32:24 drawing to the right of the column do you see it says the mark as a marker there's a markup window board and soft joint by others it's it's vertical writing I'm afraid but do you see that their second eyes exam right and that

02:32:37 their second eyes exam right and that rather suggests or indicates the new internal window reveals that would be installed as part of the end of the internal window reveal yes yes yes and

02:32:49 internal window reveal yes yes yes and above that we can see existing frame remaining in most cases removed by others where necessary you see that yes and we can see the outline in that in

02:33:01 and we can see the outline in that in the dotted line of the original metal window frame which was to remain in situ in place in most cases am I right about that that's what you just mentioned yes

02:33:12 that that's what you just mentioned yes yep that's it just to get it right on the drawing and and and below the outline of the original metal the the original metal window frame we can see

02:33:24 original metal window frame we can see the insulation indicated and the mark up insulation by others yeah that yeah and there is a drawing pattern which

02:33:35 there is a drawing pattern which indicates the insulation yes yes yes

02:33:42 but by the way I should just ask you this question does that patent to you indicate an insulation of mineral wool

02:33:58 I think traditional drawing convention

02:34:04 let's see especially when for people who are using computers then you'd probably see yeah that's definitely mineral wool I think what's happened particularly

02:34:16 I think what's happened particularly last 20 or so years is the conventions on representing insulation have been relaxed somewhat and that's certainly my experiences have seen the fall be

02:34:31 experiences have seen the fall be pattern and the hatch pattern used interchangeably to represent different types of insulation that may have come about just because through their arm or form the type installations around but

02:34:42 form the type installations around but also when you start using BIM Revit and programs like that they are people were also started to use other forms of representation for installation as well such as yellow blocking and stuff of

02:34:56 such as yellow blocking and stuff of that so and then in the year of drawing boards I'd have said you should be you've been have been more inclined to read that is categorically a mineral

02:35:09 read that is categorically a mineral wool type insulation but I think those boundaries have been very much blood now in this drawing as you can see at the very top above the label to existing frame yeah it's quite difficult to see

02:35:24 frame yeah it's quite difficult to see this but can you see that there is a a 40 in the gap yes which shows that the cavity there was 40 millimeters wide at the jamb condition yes

02:35:41 right so if we now go to se a zero zero

02:35:54 right so if we now go to se a zero zero zero zero zero 169 page 243 please this should be fun

02:36:05 should be fun right at the NBS spec p10 sundry insulation proofing work yes you see

02:36:19 insulation proofing work yes you see that yes and paragraph 235 near the bottom of the page compressible insulation in gaps you see that yes yes

02:36:30 insulation in gaps you see that yes yes turn manufacturer rockwool yes pen code Bridgend

02:36:34 Bridgend and you can see that there is a material second bullet point down and we've looked at this before material mineral wool 2 BS en 130 162 you see that yes

02:36:50 now if we look back please at

02:36:59 the drawing that scheduled a different drawing if we go to the offline version of se a zero zero zero zero two four nine nine just want to show you a studio

02:37:11 nine nine just want to show you a studio he employs requirement drawing because one we've already seen before actually but yes we can see this is a studio e

02:37:28 but yes we can see this is a studio e employer's requirement drawing from September 2013 proposed typical Bay plans section and elevation now we can

02:37:39 plans section and elevation now we can see there's there's no indication of any packing material to the internal window lining there is there if you look at the proposed section typical Bay on the right and I think I have to blow up at them if you blow that up please perhaps

02:37:52 them if you blow that up please perhaps a bit more yes and then focus in on that if you look down that you can see that there's no it's solid wood board and never yeah I can see and the studio II

02:38:04 never yeah I can see and the studio II have specified the compressible rock wall insulation in the NBS as we've just seen but neither mineral will nor rock would have specified on this drawing is it and this specific crime that's right

02:38:20 now

02:38:23 moving away from that a little do you accept that Studio II ought to have produced one in five detailed drawings which showed inadequate detail how the voids that we've looked at around the

02:38:35 voids that we've looked at around the window linings at head jams and sills should have been packed with insulation no why don't you accept that the the

02:38:47 no why don't you accept that the the detail designing the cladding we'd precipitate the resolution of that detail and then from that detail and

02:38:58 detail and then from that detail and following that detailed process be able to address that at one to five scale see the work is indicated in the NBS

02:39:09 the work is indicated in the NBS specification as to what's got to go in there no that's a that's just as general Clause that you'd apply it to that kind of area it seemed with for example and

02:39:21 of area it seemed with for example and said k10 on linings it mentions about fire ceiling of the linings up to the openings did you ever have a discussion with Holly about the choice of

02:39:32 with Holly about the choice of insulating materials to be used in the gaps that we've been looking at in those gaps no no say are you simp are you

02:39:44 gaps no no say are you simp are you really saying that you just left it to Harley to get on with did did the detailed design of that acquiring package was for Harley where Harley of

02:39:57 package was for Harley where Harley of as I noted these said work to be completed by others then this is an issue for a ridin in their package split he did you think the others would be

02:40:11 he did you think the others would be that's an issue for riding and this package split and subcontractors that's what they do they manage the packages and they manage the interfaces if the for example if they'd wanted a detailed

02:40:22 for example if they'd wanted a detailed to resolve that interface the problems that come out of the let's say real English renegotiated position of Harley in terms of where that interface starting and stopping

02:40:34 that interface starting and stopping stopped then I'd expect Brighton to issue an RFI to me asking for clarification which point we would have produced that detail if they'd requested it

02:40:51 can you go back to se a zero zero zero zero three four sorry three zero four zero this is something we've looked at before go to

02:41:05 something we've looked at before go to page seven this is the this is the drawing we looked at twice I think now this is the one she was damped on the

02:41:16 this is the one she was damped on the 16th of January 2015 this is the stamped version yes remember we looked at the East and yeah II understand this is the stamp version I just want to ask you about about that hmm you can see that

02:41:28 about about that hmm you can see that it's a it's approved for construction understand by you no no it's a stamp I mean it's not approved for construct a stamp but it's stamped approved for construction and then stand by you yes

02:41:40 construction and then stand by you yes yes

02:41:49 so and I'll try to see it on this version oh yes there it is at the top right hand corner we looked at it before existing frame remains in place in most

02:42:00 existing frame remains in place in most cases removed by others where necessary and then again insulation by others just looking at that you wereyou quite content to mark this status a even

02:42:12 content to mark this status a even though this was going to be insulation to be left for other people as I've city before our comments based on

02:42:23 before our comments based on architectural turn the package split in terms of package responsibilities of interfaces between packages is a matter for men contractor having seen the NBS

02:42:35 for men contractor having seen the NBS specification which very clearly spelt out the use of rockwool in these gaps why did you stamp this status a when the drawing didn't refer to the use of rock

02:42:48 drawing didn't refer to the use of rock wall in that space where it says insulation by others this aria that doesn't follow for example they say Harley bug read that this is within

02:43:00 Harley bug read that this is within their package of works which they would have had to have done with Rhydon then Ryden would then decide whose package of works that fell into in siding whose

02:43:12 works that fell into in siding whose package of works it falls into riding then a responsible for issuing the design information that that subcontractor would require to complete their works that would include this back

02:43:24 their works that would include this back I don't understand that I'm afraid mr. Crawford what I'm trying to understand is why you were able to stamp this drawing as conforming to a design intent

02:43:35 drawing as conforming to a design intent in circumstances where the drawing did not refer to the specific insulation that studio itself had specified should go into the gap where it says insulation by others but that's because what

02:43:48 by others but that's because what they've well Harley have drawn is indicative package works from someone else what I'm saying to use if Harley if agreed

02:43:55 agreed I'll they've agreed their package of work

02:43:58 work which is what they've identified on their drawing but what they were not completing would be to be completed by someone else in order to get to that position it had to greet it with ridin

02:44:09 position it had to greet it with ridin ridin as the main contractor had to decide who was completing that portion of works in order for them to agree who's carrying out that portion of works

02:44:20 who's carrying out that portion of works they'd have to give them a brief I sell drawings to suspect in order to do that so that information would be contained within that package of works they

02:44:31 within that package of works they wouldn't be giving the Harley's drawings to an our subcontractor why didn't you comment on this drawing

02:44:44 why didn't you comment on this drawing and ask let me just ask the question please mr. cook if I can when you stamp this day to say why didn't you insist that instead of insulation by others it

02:44:57 that instead of insulation by others it said mineral wool because that was what was in the NBS spec I'm sorry they just doesn't follow I mean I could sit and cyst on any comment on anything I mean

02:45:09 cyst on any comment on anything I mean what they've noted is here's the portion of work that isn't ours so why should I comment on it I don't know why I don't know what they intended to put in there I don't know what I'm riding intended to

02:45:22 I don't know what I'm riding intended to put in there since I no contract they could administer as they saw fit assuming they are greeted with decline KCT mo to understand is what I mean

02:45:33 KCT mo to understand is what I mean having comment on the concrete column while the comment on the concrete column it's nothing to do with Harley's work and commenting on Harley's work mr. prophet what I'm suggesting to you is

02:45:44 prophet what I'm suggesting to you is that by leaving the words insulation by others in the drawing it might be thought that knew you were approving the suggestion that some other kind of insulation other than that specified in the NBA specification that I used but

02:45:55 the NBA specification that I used but why would I be and why would I be suggesting that by not commenting on it well I'll ask the question and I'd noted you responded to it with a question I'll move on again sorry clear I'm not

02:46:10 I'll move on again sorry clear I'm not trying to be difficult this is just my understanding of how you you mark up some contracts or strikes now can we again sorry can I just see if I can help you I mean I think what mr. millet is

02:46:23 you I mean I think what mr. millet is really asking is why when the specification that studio he had formulated prescribed mineral were you not did you not comment on the fact that

02:46:35 not did you not comment on the fact that the drawing which eventually emanated from Harley did not seem to provide for mineral wall he provided Fred any insulation to be supplied by a third

02:46:46 insulation to be supplied by a third party but it doesn't seem out it just shows an insulation exactly not meant not necessarily mineral yes and that's the question why was this not a matter

02:46:59 the question why was this not a matter of common when it allowed for a departure from the specification but for example if you have a kid there the insulation at the front and in the diagonal I don't think he says exactly

02:47:12 diagonal I don't think he says exactly what that insulation is

02:47:17 well maybe but you get my point I mean I wouldn't I mean I haven't the the hatched area inside the window is some

02:47:28 hatched area inside the window is some form of neoprene insulation that's not labeled either all right so you you you

02:47:40 labeled either all right so you you you what you're saying is you didn't consider it something that required comment yeah simply because it didn't reflect with exactness what was in the specification but you you can't tell

02:47:55 specification but you you can't tell what exactly fights for this spec or not from that you know I mean if it said if it said styrene form something like this

02:48:06 it said styrene form something like this then okay you could see that's not what's in this back hmm but even then it's labeled by Lars but am I supposed

02:48:18 it's labeled by Lars but am I supposed to vote I'm being asked to comment on which is Harley's contribution mr. cool

02:48:32 which is Harley's contribution mr. cool thank you for that can we please turn to se a zero zero zero one two nine four zero

02:48:45 yes this is an email from Jason North he's writing to you dated the 12th of March 2015 a copy to Simon O'Connor also

02:48:58 March 2015 a copy to Simon O'Connor also have writen and the subject is Windows Glenn felt our a Jason North was the site manager at the time did you remember that yes afternoon Neal we are installing

02:49:09 yes afternoon Neal we are installing Windows at the moment and I can't seem to find anywhere a detail for insulation behind the fixed panel alongside the windows can you point me in the right direction with this now from that email

02:49:22 direction with this now from that email did you know at least by then that the packing material to be used behind the internal linings to the windows had not been specified I don't think that's

02:49:34 been specified I don't think that's exactly what that question is asking well what did you understand by his question

02:49:42 I think he means the the I think he means effects panel within the windows

02:49:55 means effects panel within the windows where the concrete well this precast concrete is a kind of I'm otherwise it's himself there are more cream book or something came up I think he's looking for the insulation

02:50:06 think he's looking for the insulation detail round the back that if I'm reading that Crowley right did you go back and look at the relevant drawings to try to answer his question in the way

02:50:18 to try to answer his question in the way you just said you understood it and I don't recall but possibly yes do you think you went back to check the

02:50:29 do you think you went back to check the NBS specification I don't recall did you make any inquiry of Harley or riding regarding the type and product name of the insulation he was talking about as you understood it I

02:50:41 was talking about as you understood it I don't think that was within Harley's works if he's the bamboo that we were talking about I think they're talking about did this not prompt you to go to

02:50:52 about did this not prompt you to go to Ryden or ask somebody else at ridin but perhaps I mean O'Connor the question why you were being asked this question and not Holly no because I don't if it's the

02:51:05 not Holly no because I don't if it's the bit I think he's referring to he's part of the internal dry lining package she was behind that said that's of central column ailment and it sits behind the

02:51:17 column ailment and it sits behind the middle the windows the middle of the windows so I see so you think he was talking about the insulation behind the infill panels we call them infill panels which were going to come to later yeah they lose infill panel with these

02:51:32 yeah they lose infill panel with these are I think there's a thermal cream corn rally element and I think in court you suppose the insulation round and behind that I think okay let's look at your

02:51:43 that I think okay let's look at your statement because I think we get a bit of help from that se a 0 0 0 1 4 2 7 5 page 41 keys and you deal with mr. North's inquiry at

02:51:56 and you deal with mr. North's inquiry at paragraph 1 1 8 we can look at that you say you refer to the email and you say I've not found a response this is the last sentence I have not found a response but I believe I would have

02:52:07 response but I believe I would have pointed him towards to do ease one in 20 section drawings you see that yes in fact it's likely in that you didn't respond to this query at all given that we've not been able to find any email

02:52:18 we've not been able to find any email response from from you so well you're seeing that better than I did speak with juice North quite a lot on site sort of know if that's necessarily true well do

02:52:30 know if that's necessarily true well do you have a recollection of dealing with his query

02:52:35 his query honest I don't [Music]

02:52:42 you say that you believe you would have pointed him toward studio he's one in 20 section drawings but we've already seen some of them and they don't indicate any packing materials to the internal window

02:52:53 packing materials to the internal window lining about and there's sorry there's more than just the drawing you showed me in 1 to 20 for example the dry lining type drawings

02:53:07 for example the dry lining type drawings I think there's a junction detail on that that might cover it ok let's let's look at something else on this aspect

02:53:27 did you remember that mr. Dixon of SD were engaged by I think writing to

02:53:39 were engaged by I think writing to undertake some of the internal lining and plastering works I don't know mr. Dixon right do you remember having any

02:53:51 Dixon right do you remember having any discussions either with Rhydon or an entity called SD plastering or indeed anybody else about the selection of materials for use within the cavity we've been looking at you know do you

02:54:04 we've been looking at you know do you know why PIR and sometimes phenolic insulation was packed behind the window jambs and sills rather than the rockwool

02:54:15 jambs and sills rather than the rockwool which was specified in the NBS better hey I no idea that that had happened till after the fire and some pictures of the exploit serious right does it does

02:54:28 the exploit serious right does it does it surprise you well did it surprise you when you discovered that fact yes

02:54:39 so can we take it that you and nobody else at Studio E were ever aware of the decision whoever it was to use PIR or phenolic as insulation in those areas

02:54:54 when you went on your site visits did you not see the use of PIR or phenolic insulation in those areas when we had site visits there are two levels to the

02:55:07 site visits there are two levels to the management office for site meetings we to even have any inspection appointment or monitoring appointment in that regard so we went looking at we weren't sure

02:55:20 right I mean I going to turn to the next topic which is the window insulated infill panels and cavity insulation which made up part of the fenestration

02:55:32 which made up part of the fenestration or window arrangement at Grenfell tower now we can look at it again but we've already established that in the NBS specification an aluminium faced insulated infill core panel had been

02:55:45 insulated infill core panel had been specified I can get back to the spec if you like mr. Courson know to have a coffee look all that much that we and I think we've also established and again we can go back to it if you like that there's no reference in the spec to a product or type of insulation to be used

02:55:58 product or type of insulation to be used as the insulated infill panel in the tender drawing there's a Performance Pack yes now can we look please at har

02:56:10 Pack yes now can we look please at har zero zero zero zero eight eight eight six

02:56:29 right thank you and this is a Harley drawing Kevin lambs 22nd of September 2014

02:56:37 2014 typical BAE levels 1 to 20 West straight East elevation you see that yes and this is the as his revision d-day to the 3rd of March 2015

02:56:48 of March 2015 ok and you could see how the build-up of the revisions went and this latest one is firebreaks added you see that yes right now let's look at the the window arrangement you can see that the window

02:57:01 arrangement you can see that the window passing between the columns across the flat partitions is shaded and designated p1 it's not very clear on what we've got on the screen but perhaps we can expand

02:57:14 on the screen but perhaps we can expand the bigger shaded squares there are two of them perhaps we can expand the left-hand one for convenience so that everybody can see it you can just see in

02:57:25 everybody can see it you can just see in the top left hand corner a p1 yes yes mr. operator I wonder if we could just blow that up a little bit more so that everybody in the room and in the and in

02:57:36 everybody in the room and in the and in public can see that to be absolutely clear because its designation p1 is important and while we're at it will you also agree with me that the smaller shaded area where the shading goes from

02:57:47 shaded area where the shading goes from bottom right to top left is is marked p2 yes yes

02:57:56 now if we look please next at har we'll come back to that in due course but har zero zero zero zero three eight six six

02:58:07 zero zero zero zero three eight six six that was three eight eight six let's look at three eight six six this is the Harley specification note some of which we looked at yesterday I'm not sure we

02:58:18 we looked at yesterday I'm not sure we looked at this one yesterday it's dated it's dated four origin 15th of January 2015

02:58:26 2015 Kevin lamb again see that yes and we can see that mr. lamb here specifies if you ignore the read annotations outer this

02:58:37 ignore the read annotations outer this is on the the left hand side under glazing g1 vision do you see it says outer two millimeter aluminium you see

02:58:51 outer two millimeter aluminium you see that two millimeter aluminium skin this is under glazing p1 panels I should have said should be clicks there's quite a

02:59:03 said should be clicks there's quite a lot of glazing in there yeah glazing p1 panels you see yes two millimeter aluminium core and then underneath to two millimeters aluminium skin and then

02:59:15 two millimeters aluminium skin and then underneath that core to 24 millimetres kingspan t p10 rigid insulation and then in a two millimeters aluminium skin you see that yes and that's for p1 and then

02:59:27 see that yes and that's for p1 and then for p2 which was the smaller little square we saw an outer two millimeter aluminium skin core 24 millimeter kingspan in a two millimeters aluminium skin yes just to note this this is not

02:59:40 skin yes just to note this this is not my handwriting no I well I was going to ask you do you know whose handwriting it is no but it's not mine do you know when those read annotations were applied I haven't seen this drawing

02:59:53 were applied I haven't seen this drawing in this form so no I don't know who or when that was done I assumed it was someone from your team my team yeah I booked me was like someone's measuring

03:00:04 booked me was like someone's measuring something against what was actually but the short answer is you don't know who yes add a little when yeah all right say can I take it from that that you never saw this version of this document

03:00:17 never saw this version of this document with those additions to it no right more generally we're you aware at the time that the insulation material had been amended

03:00:28 insulation material had been amended under p1 from kingspan TP ten to twenty five millimeters of styrofoam I don't

03:00:41 five millimeters of styrofoam I don't believe so but again I've been commenting on architectural intent as far as drawings were concerned if someone had changed something beyond this then I would have been aware of it

03:00:53 this then I would have been aware of it right well let's pursue this a bit more can you go please - har zero zero zero zero three eight six nine

03:01:09 and we'll just do this drawing and then and then break because there's a string of these to look at this is the same

03:01:22 of these to look at this is the same document in printed form stamped by you on the 26th of January yes I'm sorry I just misled you let me just do is take

03:01:34 just misled you let me just do is take it a different way start with your stamp on the right hand side studio II used Santa's be on the 26th of January 2015 yes yes now if you look at the left hand

03:01:46 yes yes now if you look at the left hand side you can see that under glazing p1 panels we now have core 25 millimeters styrofoam yes so the p1 they've changed

03:01:58 styrofoam yes so the p1 they've changed the p1 but not the Peter exactly now when you saw this specification note did you did you notice that change you mean

03:02:15 you did you notice that change you mean when I was commenting on this drawing yes

03:02:22 well I couldn't say but I would have been commenting as a mitten doctor now on an architectural intent so that's how they've been looking for that searching

03:02:33 they've been looking for that searching [Applause]

03:02:37 do you know why the amendment was made to Styrofoam in p1 but not in p2 have absolutely an idea did you or Kevin Lam

03:02:51 absolutely an idea did you or Kevin Lam to your knowledge ever inform the author of the read annotations and I suppose if you didn't know who it was he wouldn't have done but did you did you know whether anybody ever told whoever it

03:03:07 whether anybody ever told whoever it might be had written that there and had made the change that the prescription of styrofoam was not being followed for p2 and raised that question getting a

03:03:20 and raised that question getting a little confused so yes I'm not surprised it was a confusing question did you or to your knowledge Kevin Lam ever raised the question with anybody as to why t

03:03:34 the question with anybody as to why t p10 had been removed for p1 and replaced with styrofoam

03:03:41 I have no regulation did you ever discuss the use of styrofoam within the external wall build up with anybody at Studio E not at rekall

03:03:54 Studio E not at rekall did you ever raise the issue with Holly no call do you ever did you ever raise it with Rhydon no do you know all agree that styrofoam is a trading name for

03:04:06 that styrofoam is a trading name for extruded polystyrene insulation otherwise known as x2s I'm aware of XPS and it's used XPS is used in inverted roof structures for example and with

03:04:17 roof structures for example and with fire retardant in it alright we're going to look at p2 after the after the break mr. chairman I think now is a reasonably good at the time for a break good moon yes all right mr. Crawford well I'm afraid enough for

03:04:30 mr. Crawford well I'm afraid enough for some lunch yeah please don't talk to anyone about your evidence period then resume at five past two please

03:04:51 but if I fast - please thank you

↩ All hearings