黑洞社区

Kingspan was not dishonest about its test data for a flammable insulation product which was used for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, a former technical advisor at the firm has told the inquiry.

Gareth Mills, who worked at Kingspan between 2003 and 2014, told Wednesday鈥檚 hearing that his former employer had been seeking to 鈥渕aximise what scope they could get on approvals鈥� for its K15 Kooltherm insulation 鈥� but he was not aware that the firm had 鈥渁t any stage鈥� been dishonest about the testing which was used to prove to clients that it was safe.

The inquiry has already heard how Kingspan had changed the chemical composition of its K15 product a year after it had passed a 2005 fire test but had continued to use the test results from the older version of the product to market the newer version as safe for use on buildings above 18m.

In a letter sent to the 黑洞社区 Research Establishment (BRE) last month, Kingspan said it was 鈥渘ow of the view鈥� that the product it had been selling to the market since 2006 was different to what had been tested.

But former Kingspan technical product manager Ivor Meredith told Monday鈥檚 hearing that it had been 鈥渃ommon knowledge鈥� at the firm that the newer K15 had been using outdated test data.

The inquiry has already heard that the newer K15, which Kingspan had been selling for over 14 years before it withdrew its test data last month, had turned a 2007 test rig into a 鈥渞aging inferno鈥� that had to be extinguished out of fears that it would endanger the testing laboratory.

Yesterday鈥檚 hearing was told how Kingspan had been 鈥渁ttempting to avoid鈥� any mention in a certificate issued by approvals body the British Board of Agrement (BBA) that K15 could only be installed above 18m if it used the specific system tested in 2005.

Inquiry barrister Kate Grange QC asked Mills: 鈥淲ould you accept now that there was a culture at Kingspan of trying to minimise the limitations on K15, rather than being transparent and accurate with its customers and with organisations like the BBA?鈥�

Mills replied: 鈥淚 would say, yes, they did want to maximise, you know, what scope they could get on approvals and things like that. I don鈥檛 think at any stage they were sort of dishonest about what test data they had; or not that I was aware of, anyway.鈥�

In an email sent to Mills from technical manager Philip Heath in July 2008 on potential revisions to the draft of a BBA report on K15, Heath suggested replacing the word 鈥渂lockwork鈥� 鈥� referring to the substrate material which the insulation had been attached to in the 2005 test 鈥� with 鈥渘on combustible鈥�, adding that it 鈥渕ight allow us to use a little spin in future鈥�.

Mills was asked by Grange if he was aware at the time that, even without the relevant test data, 鈥渢here was a deliberate marketing strategy being pursued by Kingspan to widen the scope of this certificate and other certificates?鈥�

Mills replied: 鈥淚 suppose they did want things to be as general as possible, yeah.鈥�

鈥淏ut did it ever occur to you that this was a matter of life safety?鈥�, Grange asked. Mills replied: 鈥淚 don鈥檛 propose to be an expert and know exactly how much effect certain details have.鈥�

Grange asked: 鈥淏ut you must have been aware that there were potential health and safety consequences as to whether or not this product was used in tall buildings, including tall residential buildings?鈥�

Mills said: 鈥淯m, yeah, I knew there was a requirement to follow regulations, yeah.鈥� Grange replied: 鈥淎nd what underpins those regulations is life safety isn鈥檛 it?鈥� Mills answered: 鈥淯m, yeah I assume that鈥檚 probably something that鈥檚 involved when they鈥檙e writing them, yes.鈥�

But Mills did admit he thought there was 鈥渁 possibility鈥� that the marketing material for K15 had been misleading when inquiry chairman Martin Moore-Bick intervened when Mills was asked about a certificate for K15 obtained from the Local Authority 黑洞社区 Control which stated wrongly that the insulation was a 鈥渕aterial of limited combustibility鈥�.

Moore-Bick asked Mills: 鈥淚t didn鈥檛 trouble you that it was misleading?鈥� Mills replied: 鈥淵eah, maybe that was a 鈥� you know, a little bit of a jump perhaps.鈥� When pressed further by Moore-Bick, Mills said: 鈥淚t didn鈥檛 mislead me, no.鈥�

But Moore-Bick continued: 鈥淣o, no, that鈥檚 not the question I asked,鈥� he said, adding: 鈥淒id you think it was misleading鈥�in the sense that it was liable to mislead someone who didn鈥檛 have the same degree of technical knowledge that you had?鈥� Mills replied: 鈥淚t鈥檚 a possibility, looking back, yeah.鈥�

Kingspan has said in a statement that it had no role in designing or planning the cladding system used for the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower, and had not provided any advice to those working on the project around the suitability of K15 in the cladding system used.

The first phase of the inquiry into the fire which killed 72 people in June 2017 found that the refurbishment鈥檚 ACM cladding was the primary cause of the fire鈥檚 spread.

The inquiry continues.