Mr. Martin Lynch:

As part of the task, the request was to investigate what could be set as a threshold for accepting the worst-affected homes to the scheme. As Mr. Owens mentioned, a sample of some of the redacted reports was reviewed by the expert group that gave some examples of data collated from Mayo. We also looked at our experience of having remediated approximately 2,500 houses and the damage criteria assessed against IS 398, a similar type of scheme. We also reviewed some other industry-recognised standards for determining crack width and damage to properties; they would be set out in Subsidence ofLow-Rise Buildings, 3rd Edition, from the Institute of Structural Engineers in 2000 and the Building Research Establishment Digest, No. 251.

Reviewing all those documentation and bearing in mind the high level of applications that would be received by the scheme, and with the ultimate aim of bring worst-case homes to the front, looking after and prioritising them, the collective group decision was that 1.5 mm was a fair and reasonable reflection of that threshold. The group also recommended that it would be reviewed, similar to the Structural Engineers Ireland, SEI, costings on a regular basis. This would take into account whether the threshold has held, if it must be adjusted or if there is information from other studies of the NSAI on whether it is foundation or core testing from the Housing Agency that will carry out the protocol to assist us in reviewing that threshold. That will potentially happen on an annual basis or at the Minister's request. That is how we got to that recommendation.