Grenfell inquiry resources
ENGINEERING
Grenfell inquiry resources
see these claims hitting the courts . There is clear pressure on the industry to resolve these issues and a series of uncertainties which the courts may be called on to resolve .”
He said there is uncertainty over the interpretation of paragraph 12.7 of part B4 of Approved Document B to the 2010 Building Regulations , and whether it applies to the filler material in cladding panels . Dr . Barbara Lane ' s evidence to the Grenfell Inquiry was that this filler material did not have to be of limited combustibility as paragraph 12.7 did not apply , but other fire engineers and experts disagree .
“ Moreover , there is growing uncertainty over who is liable for upgrading remedial works to meet the new ban on combustible materials ,” he added . “ Remedial works carried out now are likely
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry has found Arconic ’ s Reynobond 55 PE panels were the “ primary cause ” of the spread of the fire . In recent submissions , Arconic Marketing Manager Gerard Sonntag asked colleagues what the costs would be of only selling aluminium composite material ( ACM ) with a fire-resistant core , rather than the polyethylene ( PE ) plastic alternative , after hearing about the potential dangers in a presentation in Norway in 2007 , according to reports . “ Mr . Sonntag recommended Arconic withdraw its more flammable cladding from sale – that didn ’ t happen ,” said Tom Symonds , Home Affairs Correspondent for BBC Radio 4 . “ Another issue it highlights is the degree to which a company should be held responsible for the end use of the product it makes . Arconic says it had no control over that – the inquiry may take a different view .” While Kingspan said it had no role in the design of the Grenfell cladding system , its products constituted around 5 % of the insulation used in a system that was not compliant with building regulations , according to Reuters .
constructionglobal . com 61