State mica assessment not ‘fit for purpose’

Engineers say the state’s standard for assessing mica redress grants – used to downgrade homeowners to cheaper remediation options – is neither appropriate nor grounded in science.

In correspondence seen by The Ditch, Engineers Ireland’s director-general said it’s “the view of many engineers that the existing standard is no longer fit-for-purpose and developments in the scientific understanding of this issue must be appropriately considered”. Engineers Ireland confirmed to The Ditch that the assessment standard “must be urgently updated to reflect new developments”.

The Ditch has seen several appeals showing that the state’s method of assessing affected homes – run by the Housing Agency – is leading to homeowners being forced into cheaper remediation works and denied appropriate repairs. One independent engineer went as far as accusing the Housing Agency of intentionally using an inappropriate standard for assessing damage.

In private advice to government, former attorney general Paul Gallagher said, “In Donegal… it is hoped that re-building would be the exception and that the other remedial options” – which would be cheaper – “would more likely to be applicable,” as reported by The Ditch.

Homeowners affected by the crisis have had their grants downgraded on the recommendation of an engineering company linked to the chair of the state’s mica expert group, also reported by The Ditch.

‘No longer fit-for-purpose’

The director general of Engineers Ireland, a professional body representing more than 25,000 engineers, Damien Owens in April of this year wrote of his concerns with the Housing Agency’s methods of determining grants under the state’s mica scheme.

Owens said that engineers have serious criticisms of the scheme – with many distrusting IS 465, the standard for assessing damage to properties. Both homeowners and engineers say it fails to account for scientific discoveries that show pyrrhotite, rather than mica, is responsible for much of the damage to defective Donegal homes.

"I.S465:20+A12020 is now under much-needed review by the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI)" wrote Owens on April 24. “While it is important that the outcome of this review should not be preempted in this response, it is nevertheless the view of many engineers that the existing standard is no longer fit-for-purpose and developments in the scientific understanding of this issue must be appropriately considered.”

The Housing Agency using an outdated standard means defective homes are not being recommended for the appropriate remediation options, homeowners and independent engineers say. One engineer went as far as accusing the Housing Agency of knowingly using an inappropriate standard.

In March a survey of Engineers Ireland's register members showed widespread disagreement between independent engineers and those hired by the Housing Agency. Three-quarters of surveyed engineers reported their recommendations for full demolition were downgraded.

‘Deliberately using the wrong process for assessing damage’

The Housing Agency’s engineers review the reports carried out by independent engineers hired by homeowners and make the final decisions on remediation options.

The Ditch has seen numerous appeals submitted by homeowners to the Housing Agency that show significant differences between assessments made by independent engineers and those conducted by engineers hired by the Housing Agency.

In one appeal an independent engineering company representing a homeowner said their house should be demolished because of high levels of pyrrhotite in its concrete blocks. They say the muscovite mica content in the house is six percent, just more than the five percent threshold considered dangerous.

The firm claimed that pyrrhotite, not mica, is the primary cause of the property's deterioration. This assessment contradicts the Housing Agency’s engineers, who attributed the damage to mica and recommended a cheaper remediation option.

In another appeal a chartered engineer criticised the Housing Agency for failing to properly consider the risk of internal sulphate attack from pyrrhotite in retained blockwork.

The engineer accused the Housing Agency of deliberately using the wrong process for assessing damage.

A third appeal seen by The Ditch showed an independently hired chartered engineer recommending a full demolition and rebuild because of high levels of pyrrhotite in the concrete blocks – contradicting the Housing Agency’s recommendation.

The appeal said that the Housing Agency's review was conducted as a desk study without onsite inspection, leading to a recommendation for a less extensive remediation option.

Earlier this month The Ditch reported that Donegal County Council labelled crucial evidence in mica scheme applications as "DO NOT USE UNDER ENHANCED SCHEME," resulting in applications being downgraded.

An Engineers Ireland’s spokesperson referred to the organisation’s recent appearances before oireachtas committees, where it “communicated that it is the view of many engineers working in the area that the IS 465 standard is no longer fit-for-purpose”.

The spokesperson said these engineers say ”it must be urgently updated to reflect new developments in the scientific understanding of this issue. To this end, we have called on the Government to divert all necessary resources to the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) to ensure that a revision is completed by the end of this year.”

The spokesperson said, “It is essential that the standard is updated as soon as possible.”

A Housing Agency spokesperson said, “The Housing Agency engages chartered engineers, who are members of Engineers Ireland, to provide appropriate remediation option recommendations in accordance with IS 465.”

“In some instances, the remediation options differ to that of a homeowner’s engineer. That can be expected where a range of remediation options exist under IS 465. The Housing Agency takes into consideration pyrrhotite as identified within the Ministerial Guidelines for the scheme, whilst also taking into consideration all aspects of IS 465,” added the spokesperson.